Optimization

WebP vs AVIF: Which Next-Gen Image Format Should You Use?

For a decade the web ran on JPG and PNG. Now there are two strong successors — WebP and AVIF — and both are widely supported. So which should you actually use? Here's the 2026 comparison, with real numbers and a clear recommendation.

The 20-second answer

  • Want the smallest files? → AVIF (with a WebP or JPG fallback).
  • Want zero compatibility risk and fast encoding? → WebP.
  • Best of both? → Serve AVIF, fall back to WebP, fall back to JPG.

WebP: the universal all-rounder

WebP (from Google) has been supported in every major browser since 2020. It does lossy (beats JPG by ~25–30%) and lossless (beats PNG by ~25%), and supports transparency and animation. It encodes and decodes quickly, and virtually every image tool and CMS handles it. It's the safe, boring, excellent default.

AVIF: the compression champion

AVIF is built on the AV1 video codec and pushes compression further. At the same visual quality it typically produces files 20–30% smaller than WebP, and it's dramatically better at very low bitrates — where WebP and JPG fall apart into blocks, AVIF stays clean. It also supports HDR, wide color gamut and up to 12-bit depth, which matters for photography.

The trade-offs: AVIF encoding is slower (more CPU to compress), and while browser support is now broad — current Chrome, Firefox, Safari and Edge all decode it — very old browser versions may not.

Real-world numbers

A typical 1600×1067 photograph at equivalent visual quality:

FormatApprox. sizevs JPG
JPG (q80)240 KB
WebP (q80)180 KB~25% smaller
AVIF (q55)130 KB~45% smaller

Exact numbers vary by image content and encoder settings, but the ranking — AVIF < WebP < JPG — holds consistently for photographs.

How to serve both with a fallback

The HTML <picture> element lets the browser pick the best format it supports:

<picture><source srcset="hero.avif" type="image/avif"><source srcset="hero.webp" type="image/webp"><img src="hero.jpg" alt="…"></picture>

Browsers try each <source> in order and fall back to the JPG if neither next-gen format is supported. This is the production-grade pattern for 2026.

Which should you choose?

If your pipeline can generate both, serve AVIF with a WebP/JPG fallback for the best speed and safety. If you want one format and no fallback logic, WebP is the pragmatic universal pick — smaller than JPG, supported everywhere, and easy to produce. For how these compare to the classic formats, see our PNG vs JPG vs WebP guide.

Try WebP now

The free FreeCompressor image tool converts your images to WebP right in the browser — drop a file, choose WebP, compare, download. AVIF export is on our roadmap.

FAQ

Frequently asked questions

Is AVIF better than WebP?

AVIF usually produces 20–30% smaller files than WebP at the same visual quality and handles HDR and wide color gamut better. WebP encodes and decodes faster and has slightly broader support in old software. For most websites in 2026, AVIF with a WebP or JPG fallback is the best combination.

Should I use WebP or AVIF for my website?

Use AVIF as the primary format for the biggest savings, and provide a WebP (or JPG) fallback with the HTML <picture> element for maximum compatibility. If you can only pick one and want zero compatibility risk, WebP is the safe universal choice.

Do all browsers support AVIF in 2026?

AVIF is supported in current versions of Chrome, Firefox, Safari and Edge. Very old browser versions may not decode it, which is why a WebP or JPG fallback is still recommended for production sites.