PNG vs WEBP: Which Should You Use?
WEBP does almost everything PNG does at 50–80% smaller file sizes, including transparency. PNG still wins for lossless master copies and maximum compatibility. Here's the full comparison.
The one-line answer
Delivering images on a website → WEBP. Keeping a master copy, editing, or uploading to tools that might not accept WEBP → PNG.
File size: WEBP by a landslide
For typical web graphics, lossy WEBP at quality 85 produces files 50–80% smaller than the equivalent PNG with no visible difference. WEBP even has a lossless mode that beats PNG's compression by roughly a quarter. If your pages ship PNGs today, converting them is one of the easiest performance wins available.
Transparency: a tie
Both formats support full alpha transparency, including semi-transparent pixels. This is what separates WEBP from JPG as a PNG replacement — you don't give up transparent backgrounds to get the smaller files.
Compatibility: PNG, narrowly
PNG opens in everything made since the late 1990s. WEBP is supported by every modern browser and most current software, but some older desktop apps, upload forms and enterprise systems still reject it. For web delivery this doesn't matter; for sending files to unknown recipients or systems, PNG is the safer bet.
Practical recommendations
- Website images: convert PNG to WEBP and enjoy the speed.
- Master copies and works-in-progress: keep PNG (or convert WEBP back to PNG for editing).
- Received a WEBP an app won't open? Convert WEBP to PNG to keep transparency, or WEBP to JPG for a photo.