AVIF vs WebP: Which Next-Gen Image Format Should You Use?
By Andrew Butson · July 2, 2026 · 7 min read
AVIF usually produces the smaller file, but WebP is the safer default: it's older, decodes everywhere AVIF does, and encodes into more places besides.
Both are royalty-free successors to JPEG and PNG, built by adapting a video codec for still images (AVIF from AV1, WebP from VP8), and both handle lossy and lossless compression with transparency. Pick AVIF when squeezing out every extra byte matters and your pipeline can afford slower encoding; pick WebP when you want next-gen savings with the broadest possible support and the fastest turnaround.
AVIF and WebP are the two formats vying to replace JPEG and PNG on the modern web, and they get compared constantly because they solve the same problem from different directions. Both shrink images well below what JPEG manages at the same visual quality, both can hold a transparent background the way PNG does, and both are free of licensing fees for anyone who wants to encode or decode them. The difference is what's underneath.
WebP is the older of the two. Google built it in 2010 by adapting the intra-frame compression from its VP8 video codec, then added lossless and alpha modes so it could take over PNG's job too. AVIF arrived nine years later, in 2019, doing the same trick with a newer, far more capable video codec: AV1, developed by the Alliance for Open Media, a group whose members include Google, Mozilla, Netflix, Microsoft and most of the major browser and chip makers. A decade of video-compression research separates the two codecs, and it shows in the numbers.
| AVIF | WebP | |
|---|---|---|
| Based on | AV1 video codec | VP8 video codec |
| Released | 2019 | 2010 |
| Developed by | Alliance for Open Media | |
| Typical file size | Smallest of the three at matching quality | Smaller than JPEG/PNG, larger than AVIF |
| Encode speed | Slow — computationally heavy | Fast |
| Lossless mode | Yes | Yes |
| Transparency | Yes | Yes |
| HDR / wide colour | 10- and 12-bit support | Standard 8-bit |
| Browser support | All current browsers | All current browsers |
| Desktop app / tool support | Still catching up | Broad, decade-plus head start |
Compression: AVIF usually wins on bytes
AV1's prediction and transform tools are considerably more advanced than VP8's, and that advantage carries straight over into AVIF's still-image performance. At a given visual quality, AVIF files commonly come in smaller than the equivalent WebP, sometimes markedly so on photographic images with lots of fine detail, where AV1's extra prediction modes have more to work with. WebP still comfortably beats JPEG and PNG; it just doesn't quite match what AVIF can squeeze out of the same picture.
That gap narrows on simpler images, such as flat-colour graphics, screenshots and icons, where both formats are already close to their practical floor and there's less texture for AVIF's fancier prediction to exploit. For ordinary photography, though, AVIF's edge in file size is the main reason people reach for it at all.
Encode speed and ecosystem maturity: WebP wins
The cost of AVIF's better compression is time. AV1 encoding is computationally heavy — noticeably slower than WebP's VP8-derived encoder, and much slower again than JPEG's. For a one-off export that barely matters; for a pipeline re-encoding thousands of images on a deadline, or a CMS generating variants on every upload, it can be the deciding factor.
Maturity tells a similar story. WebP has had a decade-plus head start: every current browser has supported it for years, and it's had time to work its way into image editors, CMSes, build tools and CDNs. AVIF's browser support has caught up, and every major current browser now decodes it, but the wider software world moves slower than browsers do, and plenty of desktop editors, operating-system thumbnailers and older tools still don't open an AVIF without help, a gap WebP mostly closed already.
HDR and colour: where AVIF pulls ahead
Because AVIF inherits AV1's video heritage, it also inherits AV1's handling of high-dynamic-range and wide-colour content: 10- and 12-bit depth that avoids the banding you can get in 8-bit formats on smooth gradients and bright highlights. That makes it the more future-facing choice for HDR photography and rich colour work. WebP's mainstream lossy and lossless modes were designed around ordinary 8-bit web imagery, which covers the vast majority of what actually gets published, but it doesn't reach as far into specialised HDR territory.
What Morphr can and can’t do with each
There's an asymmetry worth knowing before you pick a workflow: Morphr can decode an AVIF, meaning it can read the pixels out of it, but it can't encode one, because the engine has no AVIF encoder. Converting an AVIF into JPEG, PNG or WebP works fine; going the other way, turning a JPEG or PNG into an AVIF, isn't something Morphr offers.
WebP doesn't have that restriction. Morphr both reads and writes it, through the browser's native canvas path and the WASM engine, so JPEG-to-WebP and WebP-to-JPEG both work in either direction. If a workflow specifically needs to produce AVIF files, that step has to happen in different software; Morphr is a good fit for turning an AVIF you've already received into something more universally editable, WebP included.
Choose AVIF when…
- You control both ends of the pipeline and can afford slower, one-time encoding for a smaller file that's served many times over.
- You're delivering HDR or wide-colour imagery where the extra bit depth is actually visible.
- Every extra kilobyte matters more than encoding time or how many tools recognise the format.
Choose WebP when…
- You want next-gen compression with the least compatibility risk, in tools and CMSes that have supported it for years.
- You're encoding on the fly, on upload or at request time, and need it to be fast.
- You need animation alongside transparency, which WebP has long supported.
Frequently asked questions
- Is AVIF actually smaller than WebP?
- Usually, yes — AVIF typically produces a smaller file than WebP at the same visual quality, especially on detailed photographs, because the AV1 codec it's built on has more advanced compression tools than WebP's VP8 heritage. The gap narrows on simple, flat-colour images.
- Why doesn't my software open AVIF files?
- Browser support for AVIF is now near-universal, but plenty of desktop image editors, operating-system thumbnailers and older tools haven't added a decoder yet. Converting the file to JPEG, PNG or WebP, which Morphr does entirely in your browser, sidesteps the problem immediately.
- Can Morphr convert a JPEG or PNG to AVIF?
- No — Morphr can decode AVIF (read it) but doesn’t encode it, since the engine has no AVIF encoder. It converts AVIF files into JPEG, PNG or WebP, but not the other direction.
- Does WebP support HDR like AVIF does?
- Not to the same degree. AVIF inherits AV1's 10- and 12-bit HDR and wide-colour handling; WebP's mainstream modes are built around standard 8-bit web imagery, so it doesn't reach as far into HDR territory.