Elementor vs Beaver Builder: Feature Face-Off
A comprehensive comparison of themes, performance, build speed, and code quality for WordPress agencies building at scale
TL;DR: Key Findings
We built identical sandbox sites and tested Elementor vs Beaver Builder across themes, performance, and template systems. Here’s what we found:
Build Speed: Beaver Builder is 80% faster (10 minutes vs 18 minutes for the same page)
Mobile Performance: BB scores 97/100 vs Elementor’s 88/100 on PageSpeed Insights
Desktop Performance: Essentially tied (98 vs 99 – both excellent)
Code Quality: BB generates 37% fewer wrapper divs (cleaner HTML)
Theme Approach: BB Theme provides structure out-of-box; Hello Theme is a blank canvas requiring Theme Builder for everything
Template Systems: Beaver Themer extends WordPress architecture; Elementor Theme Builder replaces it
Bottom Line: BB optimizes for speed and efficiency at scale. Elementor optimizes for unlimited design flexibility.
Best for agencies: Building 50+ pages/month? Choose BB. Design-forward boutique work? Either works, depending on priorities.
A Deep-Dive Comparison for WordPress Agencies
For agencies building dozens of WordPress sites each year, the real question isn’t which page builder has flashier demos. It’s which one holds up under scale – across 20, 50, or 100 client sites that need to stay stable for years.
Elementor and Beaver Builder both power professional workflows, but their design philosophies couldn’t be more different. Elementor pursues all-in-one flexibility with 90+ built-in widgets, visual effects, and an ever-expanding ecosystem of add-ons. Beaver Builder takes the opposite approach: fewer features, tighter code, and an obsessive focus on stability and long-term maintainability.
In August 2024, the competitive landscape shifted dramatically. Beaver Builder bundled Beaver Themer – previously a $199/year add-on – into all paid plans. For the first time, both platforms now offer complete theme-building capabilities at comparable entry-level prices. This changes the value equation entirely.
In this deep-dive comparison, we’ll examine how each stack performs across three critical layers:
- Theme Foundations – Beaver Builder Theme vs Hello Theme
- Page Builder Performance – Speed, code quality, and real-world output
- Template Systems – Beaver Themer vs Elementor Theme Builder
We’re not here to declare a winner. We’re here to show you which platform creates less friction, fewer support tickets, and more repeatable systems for the type of work your agency actually does.
Our Testing Methodology
We built identical sandbox sites on WPEngine hosting with the latest versions of WordPress, Beaver Builder Professional ($299/year for up to 50 sites), and Elementor Pro Essential ($79/year for 1 site). Every test used the same content, same images, and same hosting configuration to ensure fair comparison.
Pricing Context: For agencies managing multiple client sites, Beaver Builder Professional ($299/year) supports up to 50 sites ($5.98 per site), while Elementor’s comparable Expert plan costs $199/year for 25 sites ($7.96 per site).
Let’s break it down.
Part 1: Theme Foundations – Framework vs Blank Canvas
Before you build a single page, the theme you choose sets the foundation for everything that follows. Beaver Builder and Elementor take radically different approaches.
The Beaver Builder Theme: Opinionated Framework
The Beaver Builder Theme includes extensive customizer controls spanning 11 major sections. Before touching the page builder, agencies can configure:
What’s Available Out-of-Box:
Design Presets – Nine pre-built style variations (Default, Classic, Modern, Bold, Stripe, Deluxe, Premier, Dusk, Midnight) providing instant design foundations.
Header Controls – Top bar layout, header structure, logo positioning, navigation styling, mobile behavior.
Content Settings – Blog layouts, archive pages, search results, post templates, lightbox functionality.
Footer Management – Four widget columns built-in, footer layout options, footer styling.
Typography & Styling – Global heading styles, text controls, button styling, accent colors.
Code Injection – JavaScript, head code, header code, footer code insertion points.
Additional Tools – Custom CSS editor, export/import settings.
This “opinionated framework” approach means agencies can deliver structured sites faster – the theme handles layout architecture, while Beaver Builder handles content design.
Hello Theme: Intentional Minimalism
In stark contrast, Hello Theme offers minimal customizer options:
What’s Available:
- Site Identity (logo, title, tagline – standard WordPress)
- Menus (standard WordPress)
- Homepage Settings (static page vs blog – standard WordPress)
- Header & Footer (links to Elementor Theme Builder – not actual customization)
- Additional CSS (standard WordPress)
The “Header & Footer” section doesn’t provide configuration options – it’s a button launching Elementor’s Theme Builder. The theme intentionally stays out of the way, assuming you’ll build everything visually.
The Comparison: Two Valid Philosophies
Technical Architecture
The themes’ philosophical differences extend to their code foundations:
Beaver Builder Theme is built on the full Bootstrap framework, providing:
- Responsive grid system out-of-box
- Pre-built Bootstrap components
- Structured CSS architecture
- ~50KB footprint (still fast, but more robust)
Hello Theme uses only Normalize.css and Bootstrap Reboot (CSS resets), providing:
- Minimal browser normalization only
- No pre-built grid or components
- Bare-bones CSS foundation
- ~6KB footprint (extremely lightweight)
This architectural choice reflects each platform’s design philosophy: BB Theme provides structure and shortcuts for faster development, while Hello Theme provides maximum flexibility and minimal overhead for complete design freedom.
| Feature | BB Theme | Hello Theme |
|---|---|---|
| Customizer Sections | 11 major sections | 5 basic sections |
| Configuration Options | 50+ settings | ~5 settings (mostly standard WP) |
| Design Presets | 9 pre-built styles | None |
| Header Control | Extensive (layouts, styling, structure) | Requires Theme Builder |
| Footer Control | 4 widget columns + styling | Requires Theme Builder |
| Blog Layouts | Multiple options in customizer | Requires Theme Builder |
| Philosophy | Framework with structure | Pure blank canvas |
Neither approach is wrong – they serve different workflows:
Beaver Builder Theme = Structure First, Then Design
Agencies can configure a complete site structure in minutes using customizer settings. Need a centered logo with top bar navigation? Three clicks in the customizer. Want a different blog layout? Select it from a dropdown. The theme provides sensible defaults that non-technical clients can adjust.
Hello Theme = Pure Visual Building from Scratch
Everything happens in the Theme Builder interface. Want a header? Design it visually. Different blog layout? Build it as a template. There are no theme opinions to fight against, but there’s also no quick-setup shortcut. You build everything from scratch.
The Trade-off:
- BB Theme = Faster initial setup, some clients can adjust basics without builder access
- Hello Theme = Complete visual control, everything requires Theme Builder access
For agencies with repeatable site structures, BB Theme accelerates setup. For design-focused agencies wanting complete creative control, Hello Theme provides a blank canvas.
Part 2: Page Builder Performance & Code Quality
Philosophy matters, but so does execution. We built identical landing pages in both builders to test real-world performance.
The Test Page
We created a simple three-section landing page:
Section 1: Hero
- Full-width background image (1920x1280px, 144KB JPEG)
- Heading: “Build Better Websites Faster”
- Subheading: “Professional WordPress development for agencies”
- Call-to-action button
Section 2: Three Features
- Icon + heading + description (3 columns)
- Features: Fast Development, Clean Code, Expert Support
Section 3: Call-to-Action
- Heading: “Ready to Transform Your Agency?”
- Contact button
This represents 80% of what agencies actually build – hero sections, feature grids, and CTAs.
Finding #1: Build Speed – An 80% Difference That Compounds at Scale
We timed how long it took to build identical pages from scratch:
Beaver Builder: 10 minutes
Elementor: 18 minutes
That’s an 8-minute difference (80% longer in Elementor) for a simple 3-section page.
Why the difference?
Beaver Builder’s simpler interface meant fewer decisions at each step. Add a row, add modules, style them, done. The streamlined workflow kept momentum high.
Elementor’s additional flexibility – while powerful – required more navigation between panels, more precise container nesting (outer sections + inner containers), and more granular spacing decisions. Every widget offered more styling options, which paradoxically slowed the process.
For agencies building at scale, this compounds dramatically:
- 10 pages/month = 80 minutes saved with BB (1.3 hours/month, 16 hours/year)
- 50 pages/month = 400 minutes saved with BB (6.7 hours/month, 80 hours/year)
- 100 pages/month = 800 minutes saved with BB (13.3 hours/month, 160 hours/year)
- 200 pages/month = 1,600 minutes saved with BB (26.7 hours/month, 320 hours/year)
For a mid-sized agency building 100 pages per month, that’s 160 hours per year – nearly a full month of developer time recovered. At $100/hour, that’s $16,000 in labor savings annually.
For larger agencies building 200+ pages monthly, the time savings approach two full months of developer capacity per year.
Finding #2: Mobile Performance – Where BB Pulls Ahead
We tested both pages using Google PageSpeed Insights, which measures Core Web Vitals – the metrics that affect search rankings.
Mobile Performance:
- Beaver Builder: 97/100 (Excellent)
- Elementor: 88/100 (Good)
Desktop Performance:
- Beaver Builder: 98/100
- Elementor: 99/100
Beaver Builder scored 97 on mobile vs Elementor’s 88. The leaner markup translates directly to faster mobile performance—and mobile is Google’s primary ranking signal.
The 9-point mobile gap is significant. Google’s Core Web Vitals ranking system prioritizes mobile performance. With most traffic coming from mobile devices, this translates to real-world impact on user experience and search rankings.
Beaver Builder’s leaner mobile code delivery – fewer JavaScript dependencies and more efficient CSS – gives it a measurable edge where agencies need it most: mobile-first indexing.
Finding #3: GTmetrix Confirms Strong Performance
We also tested using GTmetrix, which provides different performance insights:
Beaver Builder:
- GTmetrix Grade: A
- Performance: 95%
- Structure: 100%
- LCP: 1.1s
Elementor:
- GTmetrix Grade: A
- Performance: 96%
- Structure: 98%
- LCP: 1.1s
On desktop-focused testing, both builders delivered excellent performance. The differences were negligible – within margin of error.
Finding #4: Code Quality Explains the Mobile Gap
Performance scores tell the story, but the HTML reveals why. We inspected the markup for our three feature callouts:
Beaver Builder: ~8 wrapper divs per callout
Elementor: ~11 wrapper divs per callout
Across three callouts, that’s 9 extra divs – a 37.5% markup increase. Elementor’s class names are also significantly longer:
- BB:
fl-callout-content(18 characters) - Elementor:
elementor-element-fea80f6-e-flex-e-con-boxed-e-con-e-parent(60+ characters)
Why this matters on mobile:
Mobile devices have less processing power than desktops. Every extra DOM node requires:
- Memory to store
- Time to parse
- CSS selector matching overhead
- Layout recalculation cost
This explains our PageSpeed findings: BB scored 97 on mobile vs Elementor’s 88. The leaner markup translates directly to faster mobile performance.
On desktop, the difference disappears. Desktop machines have enough power to handle the extra markup – hence the near-identical desktop scores (98 vs 99).
Performance Summary
| Metric | Beaver Builder | Elementor | Advantage |
|---|---|---|---|
| Build Time | 10 minutes | 18 minutes | BB (80% faster) |
| Mobile Performance | 97/100 | 88/100 | BB (+9 points) |
| Desktop Performance | 98/100 | 99/100 | Tie |
| GTmetrix Grade | A (95%) | A (96%) | Tie |
| HTML Markup | 8 divs/element | 11 divs/element | BB (37% leaner) |
| Accessibility | 90/100 | 87/100 | BB (+3 points) |
The Verdict:
Both builders deliver excellent desktop performance and identical visual output. The differences emerge in workflow efficiency (BB builds 80% faster) and mobile optimization (BB scores 9 points higher).
For agencies prioritizing speed-to-market and mobile-first performance, Beaver Builder’s leaner codebase provides measurable advantages. For agencies prioritizing design flexibility over build speed, Elementor’s additional options may justify the extra time investment.
Part 3: Template Systems – Beaver Themer vs Elementor Theme Builder
Once your base theme and builder workflow are established, the final layer is templating – how each platform handles global layouts like headers, footers, blog archives, and single post designs.
This is where “page builders” become full site builders.
Both Beaver Themer and Elementor Theme Builder accomplish this, but they take very different paths.
Themer extends WordPress.
Elementor replaces it.
Beaver Themer extends WordPress. Elementor replaces it. For agencies managing client sites long-term, this architectural difference affects stability, update compatibility, and maintenance overhead.
Beaver Themer – Extend, Don’t Replace
Beaver Themer works with WordPress’ native template hierarchy instead of overriding it. That design decision shapes everything about how it performs.
How It Works:
You build templates visually (headers, footers, single posts, archives). Themer applies those templates conditionally using WordPress rules. Templates render server-side, preserving native theme structure.
Key Strengths:
- Template Hierarchy Aware – integrates directly with core templates like
single.php,archive.php, andpage.php. - Native ACF Integration – field connections appear inline without additional setup.
- Conditional Logic – apply templates by post type, taxonomy, user role, or custom field.
- Server-Side Rendering – minimal JavaScript, faster TTFB, and leaner markup.
- Low Maintenance – less risk during WordPress updates since it respects WP’s rendering logic.
The result is a templating system that behaves like WordPress, not around it. For agencies maintaining dozens of sites, this design philosophy translates into fewer regressions and less rework after updates.
Elementor Theme Builder – Visual Power, System Replacement
Elementor’s Theme Builder takes the opposite route. It replaces WordPress’ template hierarchy entirely.
How It Works:
You design every template – header, footer, single, archive – visually within Elementor. Elementor bypasses native PHP templates and injects its own rendering system. Every piece of output becomes an Elementor layout object with wrappers, sections, and containers.
Key Strengths:
- Dynamic Tags System – integrates cleanly with ACF, Meta Box, and Pods.
- Conditional Display Rules – highly granular, including multi-condition logic (post type + taxonomy + author).
- Full Visual Control – you can build complex headers and layouts entirely in the editor.
- Reusable Global Parts – build once, reuse across templates via global widgets or saved parts.
Trade-Offs:
- More markup and client-side rendering overhead.
- Templates exist inside Elementor’s system, not the native WordPress hierarchy.
- Slightly more complex update management, as Elementor controls both layout and logic.
This approach gives designers full creative freedom but shifts the site’s architecture away from WordPress core conventions.
The Comparison: Themer vs Theme Builder
| Feature | Beaver Themer | Elementor Theme Builder |
|---|---|---|
| Integration Method | Extends WP hierarchy | Replaces WP hierarchy |
| Dynamic Data Handling | Field Connections (native ACF, Pods, Toolset) | Dynamic Tags (Elementor UI) |
| Conditional Logic | Page, taxonomy, user role, field | Any rule (multi-condition capable) |
| Rendering | Server-side | Front-end (client-side) |
| Performance | Leaner markup, faster TTFB | Heavier DOM, slower mobile parsing |
| UI Complexity | Streamlined front-end editing | Panel-driven, multi-step |
| Maintenance | Stable through WP updates | Requires Elementor version sync |
| Learning Curve | Gentle | Moderate |
Finding #5: Performance Difference Is Architectural
When we tested header and single post templates built with both tools, Beaver Themer consistently produced 20–25% fewer DOM elements and lower CSS overhead.
Elementor templates injected an additional wrapper per section or container, resulting in roughly 15–20 extra divs on a standard blog post layout.
The performance impact on desktop was negligible, but on mobile, Themer again loaded faster – matching the same pattern we saw in the page builder tests.
The Takeaway
Both tools deliver professional-grade theme-building capabilities, but their philosophies diverge sharply.
Beaver Themer respects WordPress architecture. It’s stable, lean, and predictable.
Elementor Theme Builder replaces that architecture for total design freedom at the cost of additional complexity.
For agencies building at scale, Beaver Themer’s native integration reduces long-term maintenance and minimizes risk during updates.
For design-forward studios, Elementor’s visual control allows more creative variation and bespoke presentation.
A Critical Difference: Fallback Functionality
BB Theme functions independently. Disable Beaver Builder and your site remains fully operational – headers, footers, navigation, and content display properly. You only lose custom page builder designs.
Hello Theme has minimal fallback. Disable Elementor and the site shows a basic header but no footer, with unstyled/broken page content. While not completely blank, it’s unprofessional and degraded.
For agencies, this means Beaver Builder provides a functional fallback during plugin conflicts or troubleshooting, while Elementor leaves sites in a broken state until issues are resolved.
Summary Table: Themer vs Theme Builder at a Glance
| Priority | Recommended Tool | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Speed & Maintainability | Beaver Themer | Server-side templates, native logic |
| Design Freedom | Elementor Theme Builder | Full visual control, no code limits |
| Agency Scale Efficiency | Beaver Themer | Predictable, repeatable systems |
| Boutique Design Projects | Elementor | Granular control per element |
Conclusion: Which Builder for Your Agency?
After extensive testing across themes, performance, and code quality, clear patterns emerge:
Choose Beaver Builder if you:
- Build 50+ pages per month (time savings compound dramatically)
- Prioritize mobile-first performance (97 vs 88 mobile score)
- Want faster project turnaround (80% faster build times)
- Need repeatable site structures (BB Theme accelerates setup)
- Value code quality and maintainability (37% leaner markup)
- Work with clients who adjust basic settings (theme customizer access)
Choose Elementor if you:
- Prioritize infinite design flexibility over speed
- Build fewer than 20 pages per month (time difference less impactful)
- Want granular control over every styling detail
- Prefer all-in-one visual building (no theme customizer workflow)
- Have powerful desktop development machines (desktop performance identical)
- Need the largest widget library and add-on ecosystem
The Bottom Line:
Both builders are professional-grade tools. Elementor trades efficiency for flexibility. Beaver Builder trades infinite options for speed and clean code.
For agencies building at scale – where 8 minutes per page multiplies across hundreds of projects – Beaver Builder’s workflow efficiency and mobile performance advantages translate to real cost savings and competitive advantage.
For boutique agencies or solo developers building highly customized, design-forward sites – where each project is unique and build time is secondary to creative control – Elementor’s comprehensive toolset may be worth the additional time investment.
Neither choice is wrong. The question is: what does your agency optimize for?
Testing Date: November 2025
Software Versions: Beaver Builder 2.10.0.1, Beaver Themer 1.5.2, Elementor 3.32.5, Elementor Pro 3.32.3
Hosting: WPEngine
WordPress Version: Latest
About This Comparison
This comparison was conducted using real sandbox sites with identical hosting, WordPress versions, and test content. All performance metrics were captured using industry-standard tools (GTmetrix, Google PageSpeed Insights) from the same geographic location. Build times represent actual hands-on testing by an experienced WordPress developer familiar with both platforms.
For updates to this comparison or to suggest additional tests, please contact us.