WebP vs JPG — Is WebP Always Better?
WebP is newer and technically superior to JPG in almost every metric. But there are real situations where JPG is still the right choice.
Last updated
WebP vs JPG — Is WebP Always Better?
WebP is technically superior to JPG in almost every measurable dimension. But "technically superior" and "always the right choice" are different things. Here is the complete picture.
Advertisement
Technical Comparison
| Factor | JPG | WebP |
|---|---|---|
| File size (same visual quality) | Baseline | 25–34% smaller |
| Transparency support | No | Yes (full alpha) |
| Animation support | No | Yes |
| Lossless mode | No | Yes |
| Compression algorithm | DCT | Predictive + DCT |
| Browser support | Universal (100%) | 97%+ |
| Email client support | Universal | Poor |
| Photoshop native support | Yes | Yes (CC 2021+) |
| Year introduced | 1992 | 2010 |
File Size Comparison
At equivalent visual quality (1080×1080 photograph):
| Format | File Size | vs JPG |
|---|---|---|
| JPG Q85 | 280 KB | Baseline |
| WebP Q85 | 190 KB | −32% |
| JPG Q75 | 180 KB | −35% |
| WebP Q75 | 130 KB | −54% |
WebP at Q85 is smaller than JPG at Q75 — and noticeably higher quality.
When WebP Is Clearly Better
✅ Website images — supported by 97%+ of users, 30% smaller ✅ Images with transparency — WebP replaces PNG with smaller files ✅ Animations — replaces GIF with 5–10× smaller files, full colour ✅ Core Web Vitals optimization — Google's own algorithm favours smaller pages
When JPG Is Still the Right Choice
Email attachments: Outlook 2007–2019, Apple Mail on older iOS/macOS, and many business email clients do not display WebP inline. The recipient sees a broken image or a download prompt. For email, use JPG.
Universal device compatibility: If your image will be viewed on unknown devices — including smart TVs, older smartphones, embedded browsers — JPG's 100% compatibility is a real advantage.
Printing workflows: Print shops and RIP systems are optimised for JPG (and TIFF). WebP is not a print format.
When the tool only accepts JPG: Many CMS platforms, e-commerce systems, and social media uploads still work best with JPG input.
Converting From JPG to WebP
Use our WebP Converter. The process is:
- Upload your JPG
- Set quality to 85 (equivalent visual quality to JPG Q90)
- Download WebP
- Use the
<picture>HTML element with JPG fallback for maximum compatibility
Verdict
For website images: use WebP — the 30% file size reduction is a free performance improvement with 97%+ browser support.
For email, printing, or universal compatibility: use JPG.
There is no situation where WebP looks worse than JPG at the same file size.
Frequently asked questions
Yes, with a JPG fallback for older browsers. Use an HTML <picture> element: <picture><source srcset="image.webp" type="image/webp"><img src="image.jpg" alt="..."></picture>. Modern browsers load the WebP; older browsers load the JPG automatically.
Rarely, and only for extremely simple images. In practice, WebP is always smaller than JPG at the same quality level, across all image types. The gap widens for complex photographs (WebP 30–40% smaller) and narrows slightly for very simple flat-colour images.
Yes, as of 2025 — Chrome (32+), Firefox (65+), Safari (14+), and Edge (18+) all support WebP. The only non-supporting browser is the retired Internet Explorer. Total global browser support is approximately 97% of web traffic.
For new images going forward: yes. For existing images already in production: the benefit varies. If your images are served from a CDN that auto-converts (Cloudflare Images, Imgix, Bunny.net), no manual conversion is needed — the CDN handles it. If you serve images directly, prioritise high-traffic pages and large images for manual conversion first.