WebP vs PNG: Which Image Format Should You Use?

You're building a website or preparing images for a project. You've heard WebP is better than PNG. But is it always? And when does PNG still make sense?

Both formats support transparency. Both produce sharp images. But they handle compression differently, and that changes everything about when to use each one.

Here's a clear breakdown so you can pick the right format every time.

How Does File Size Compare Between WebP and PNG?

This is where WebP pulls ahead. For the same image, WebP files are significantly smaller.

Image type	PNG size	WebP (lossy 85%)	WebP (lossless)	Savings
Product photo with transparency	1.5 MB	180 KB	1.1 MB	27-88%
Logo	80 KB	22 KB	55 KB	31-73%
Screenshot	400 KB	120 KB	280 KB	30-70%
Icon sprite sheet	200 KB	55 KB	140 KB	30-73%
Infographic	900 KB	250 KB	630 KB	30-72%

Even lossless WebP (pixel-perfect, no quality loss) beats PNG by 25-30%. And lossy WebP at 85% quality is 70-88% smaller while looking nearly identical.

For a website with 20 images, switching from PNG to WebP could cut your total image weight from 8 MB to 2 MB. That's a massive speed boost.

Does WebP Support Transparency the Same Way PNG Does?

Yes. WebP handles transparency just as well as PNG. Full alpha channel. Partial transparency. Smooth anti-aliased edges. Everything works.

The difference is how efficiently each format stores that transparency data. PNG keeps every pixel exactly. WebP compresses the transparency layer along with the color data. The result looks the same, but the file is much smaller.

One small catch: lossy WebP can sometimes create very subtle artifacts around transparent edges at low quality settings. At 80% and above, this is invisible. If you're concerned, use lossless WebP. It's still smaller than PNG.

Which Format Has Better Browser Support?

PNG works everywhere. Every browser, every email client, every app, every device. It's been around since 1996. Universal support.

WebP works in all modern browsers. Chrome, Firefox, Safari, Edge, and Opera all support it. That covers over 97% of web users. Safari was the last major holdout and added WebP support in 2020.

The only gap is very old browsers. Internet Explorer doesn't support WebP. Neither do browsers from before 2020. If you need to support these, you can use the HTML <picture> element to serve WebP to modern browsers and PNG as a fallback.

For most projects in 2026, WebP support is a non-issue. But if you're creating images for email newsletters, PNG is safer. Many email clients still don't render WebP.

When Is PNG the Better Choice?

PNG wins in specific situations where its strengths matter more than file size.

Email. Most email clients handle PNG perfectly. WebP support in email is spotty. If your image goes in an email, use PNG.

Favicons. Some browsers still expect PNG favicons. The standard favicon.ico and Apple touch icons should be PNG.

Source files for editing. If you're going to edit the image later in Photoshop, GIMP, or Figma, keep the source as PNG. WebP editing support in design tools has improved, but PNG is more reliable.

Maximum quality archives. PNG is lossless by definition. Every pixel is preserved exactly. If you're archiving important images and never want to worry about quality, PNG is the safest choice.

Platforms that don't accept WebP. Some older CMS systems, printing services, and document templates only accept PNG. Check your platform's requirements.

Social media preview images. Open Graph images for Facebook and Twitter sharing cards sometimes work better as PNG. Not all social crawlers handle WebP well.

When Should You Choose WebP Over PNG?

WebP is the better choice in most web scenarios.

Website images. Any image displayed on a web page should be WebP (or AVIF). The file size savings directly improve load times, Core Web Vitals scores, and user experience.

App assets. Mobile and web apps benefit from smaller images. Less bandwidth. Faster rendering. Better performance on slow connections.

Transparent graphics for web. Logos, icons, and UI elements with transparency are perfect for WebP. Same visual result as PNG, 30-70% smaller files.

Background images in CSS. Large decorative images compress well in WebP. A 2 MB PNG background becomes a 400 KB WebP.

Product photos on e-commerce sites. Product images with removed backgrounds (transparent) are often the heaviest images on a page. WebP cuts them down to size.

What About AVIF as an Alternative?

AVIF takes compression even further than WebP. It produces files 20-30% smaller than WebP at the same quality. It supports transparency. And browser support is now at about 93%.

The trade-off: AVIF is slower to encode. Converting a batch of images to AVIF takes longer than converting to WebP. And 93% browser support means 7% of users might not see AVIF images without a fallback.

The ideal approach for web delivery: serve AVIF as the first choice, WebP as the fallback, and PNG as the last resort. The HTML <picture> element makes this easy.

If you're picking just one format and want the safest bet, WebP wins. It has wider support than AVIF and dramatically better compression than PNG. It's the middle ground that works for almost everything.

For a complete breakdown of every format, check our image format guide.

How Do You Convert Between WebP and PNG?

ConvertIMG handles both directions. Convert PNG to WebP for web delivery. Convert WebP to PNG when you need wider compatibility. Everything runs in your browser. No files leave your device.

Pick your quality level, drop your files in, and download. Batch conversion is supported for large projects.