Top 3 Free WordPress Cache Plugin to Speed Up Your Website in 2025

In 2025, optimizing your WordPress site’s performance is crucial for user experience and search engine rankings. Implementing an effective caching plugin can significantly reduce load times and enhance overall site speed. In this article, we explore the top caching plugins that can help you achieve these goals

WordPress sites dominate a large portion of the web market, and this trend continues to grow. According to W3Techs, approximately 43.4% of websites worldwide use WordPress.

To ensure the speed and performance of a WordPress site, it is essential to use a good caching system. Many plugins promise outstanding performance, each claiming to be the best.

So, I decided to test six popular caching plugins, focusing solely on their free versions, to determine which one delivers the best results. The tests will be conducted on identical websites to ensure a fair comparison.

Tested WordPress Cache plugins:

• W3 Total Cache
• WP Super Cache
• LiteSpeed Cache
• WP Fastest Cache
• Cache Enabler
• Hummingbird Performance

📌 Quick Conclusion

I know this article is long and contains many technical details that might not interest everyone. For those who just want to see the results without diving into the details, here’s a summary of the tests:

• Cache Enabler 🏆 – Overall winner for improving load times, with a significant impact on rendering visible elements (FCP, LCP).
• WP Fastest Cache – Excellent at improving overall load time, but slightly slows down the rendering of visible elements.
• W3 Total Cache – A solid compromise. Its efficiency could be even better when combined with technologies like Redis or Memcached.

📂 Data Download: At the end of the article, you’ll be able to download all the collected data in an Excel file.

🔬 Our Testing Environment

All tests were conducted in a controlled environment to ensure a fair comparison of caching plugins without interference from server performance.

I set up a server and a WordPress installation that mimic real-world scenarios, closely resembling a live production site. Here are the technical details of this environment:

⚙️ Hosting Specifications

• Operating System: CloudLinux 8
• Server: cPanel (version 124)
• Security: Protected with Imunify360
• Resources:
  • 4 CPUs
  • 4 GB RAM
  • 10 MB/s read & write speed
• PHP Configuration:
  • Version: PHP 8.3
  • Memory Limit: 1024 MB
  • Max Execution Time: 30 seconds
  • Enabled PHP Extensions: imagick, intl, fileinfo, sodium, mbstring, etc.
  • Disabled PHP Extensions: opcache, redis, apcu, memcache (to measure only the impact of caching plugins).

🏗️ WordPress Test Configuration

• WordPress Version: 6.7.2
• Active Plugins: 31 plugins, including WooCommerce, Elementor, and Yoast SEO (full list available below).
• Site Content:
  • 20 WooCommerce products across 11 categories
  • 6 published pages + 2 drafts
  • 16 blog posts categorized into 12 categories with 15 tags

For those who want to examine all the details of the installation, see an export of the environment variables and the WordPress setup used for the different tests:

How Were the Tests Conducted?

To ensure complete transparency, here are the exact steps I followed to test each caching plugin.

In order to assess the performance of a site with and without an online store, I tested two pages with each plugin:

• The homepage (without any store elements).
• The main shop page (WooCommerce).

Google PageSpeed Insights and Lighthouse

Since Google is the most popular search engine, I found it essential to consider its evaluation of a site’s performance. To measure the impact of caching plugins on speed and user experience, I used two tools provided by Google:

• Google PageSpeed Insights – This online tool analyzes various aspects of a page and assigns an overall performance score.
• Lighthouse – Accessible via the Google Chrome browser, it provides a detailed analysis of performance and best practices.

Using these tools, I measured the following key metrics:

• Performance – A percentage score evaluating the site’s overall performance.
• Best Practices – Checks if the plugin follows Google’s recommendations and web standards.
• First Contentful Paint (FCP) – The time before the first visible element appears on the screen.
• Largest Contentful Paint (LCP) – The time required for the main content of the page to load.
• Cumulative Layout Shift (CLS) – Measures visual shifts of elements during page loading.
• Speed Index – The time it takes for all visible content to be fully displayed to the visitor.

I collected these data separately for:

• Mobile browsing (simulated smartphone on a 3G network).
• Desktop devices.

To ensure accuracy, each test was performed three times, and I recorded the average of the three measurements.

Performance Testing with Pingdom

Pingdom is a tool that evaluates website performance using several key indicators. I used this tool to measure the impact of caching plugins on the performance of my test pages (homepage and WooCommerce store page).

The tests were conducted from Pingdom’s server located in Washington, D.C., USA. Here are the key metrics I recorded for each evaluation:

• Performance grade – A percentage score indicating the overall performance of the page.
• Page size – Some caching plugins optimize scripts and CSS/JS files, so it’s essential to analyze their impact on total page size.
• Load time – The time required for Pingdom to fully load the page and analyze its performance.
• Number of requests – The total number of requests made by the browser to the server to retrieve the necessary files for page display.

Test limitation:
Pingdom imposes a limit on the number of free tests. As a result, I conducted only one test per page per caching plugin.

Analysis with Chrome Developer Tools

Google Chrome (as well as Firefox and other browsers) provides detailed insights into page loading through its Network tab in the Developer Tools.

I collected several key metrics to analyze different aspects of the page load process:

• Main DOM Load (Time To First Byte – TTFB) – Measures the time it takes for the HTML document to be sent to the browser.
• Number of Requests – Similar to the metric used with Pingdom, this helps verify whether the caching plugin reduces the number of resources needed to load the page.
• Transferred Data Size (MB) – Represents the actual amount of data sent, factoring in Gzip compression (if applied by the plugin).
• Final Load Time (Finish) – The total time before all page elements are fully loaded in Chrome.

Testing Methodology

Since these metrics were collected locally, I was able to repeat the same test multiple times. To ensure reliable results:

• Each test was performed five times.
• The two extreme values (best and worst performance) were excluded.
• The average was calculated using the remaining three results.

Performance Analysis with WebPageTest

WebPageTest is an online service that evaluates multiple aspects of a website’s performance. I used this tool to analyze key metrics and gain a detailed understanding of how caching plugins impact page loading.

Here are the metrics I focused on during my tests:

• Time To First Byte (TTFB) – Measures the time before the first byte of data is downloaded, indicating the server’s response time.
• Start Render – The moment when the first visual element appears on the page.
• First Contentful Paint (FCP) – The time before the first graphical element is displayed.
• Speed Index – The time required for the page to appear usable to the user.
• Largest Contentful Paint (LCP) – The time before the main content of the page is fully loaded.
• Cumulative Layout Shift (CLS) – Measures visual shifts of elements during page loading.
• Total Blocking Time (TBT) – Indicates how long the browser was blocked (due to heavy JavaScript execution or waiting for files).
• Transferred Data Size (MB) – The total volume of data sent, including Gzip compression if enabled by the caching plugin.

Start of Evaluations

Now that everything is set up and the methodology has been clearly defined, it’s time to proceed with testing the caching plugins.

To ensure a neutral comparison, I conducted each test on a copy of the site with no caching enabled. This allows me to precisely analyze the impact of each plugin on the site’s performance.

No WordPress Cache Plugin: The Starting Point

Before comparing the different caching plugins and findinf out which one will be in my top list, I first tested a version of the site with no cache enabled. This version serves as a baseline to assess the performance improvements provided by each WordPress cache plugin.

To keep this article concise, I have summarized the key findings below. A detailed Excel document containing all results can be downloaded at the bottom of this page.

Loading Time & Responsiveness

• First Contentful Paint (FCP): 3.67s → The first visible element appears relatively quickly.
• Largest Contentful Paint (LCP): 4.99s → The main content loads at an acceptable speed but could be optimized.
• Time To First Byte (TTFB): 2.66s → A high response time, suggesting server latency.

Size & Requests

• Number of HTTP Requests: 74.5 on average → A relatively high number that could be reduced.
• Transferred Data Size: 2.35MB → A reasonable page weight.

User Experience

• Total Blocking Time (TBT): 1.99s → A high blocking time, indicating slowdowns caused by JavaScript and CSS.
• Start Render: 5.35s → The initial display takes a while, which can impact the perceived speed of the site.

Ready for Comparison

These results provide a solid reference point to measure the actual impact of caching plugins. Now, it’s time to dive into the analysis and see which plugin delivers the best performance.

Hummingbird Performance: Test and Analysis

As soon as Hummingbird Performance was activated, a new menu appeared in the WordPress admin sidebar. Upon opening the dashboard for the first time, I was prompted to follow a setup wizard. I proceeded with the recommended steps to apply the plugin’s default configuration.

Configuration and Key Features

• Speedy Compression: The wizard first suggested enabling Speedy Compression, which, according to the plugin’s documentation, compresses and combines CSS and JavaScript files to improve performance.
• Font Optimization: Next, I was prompted to enable font swapping. This option helps render pages faster but can increase CLS (Cumulative Layout Shift) if the font loads later.
• CSS & JavaScript Optimization: The plugin offers several advanced features that are only available in the premium version, including:
  • Critical CSS generation (above-the-fold CSS).
  • Delayed JavaScript loading (e.g., animations triggered after a click).
• Page Optimization Options: The next step presented various options to optimize the site. The interface is clear and intuitive, with settings such as:
  • Automatically clearing the cache when a new post is published.
  • Adding a cache purge button in the menu for easy manual clearing.
• Advanced Settings: Finally, a third section provided access to more technical settings. I left these at their default values, as recommended by Hummingbird.
• Database Cleanup: While exploring the plugin, I found a database cleanup tool that removes unnecessary entries (e.g., old transients, post revisions). Following the plugin’s recommendation, I deleted 296 entries.
• Lazy Loading for Comments: Hummingbird also includes a lazy load feature for comments, ensuring that they only load when the visitor reaches the comments section.

Cache verification

Before running the performance tests, I analyzed the page source code to ensure the plugin was functioning properly. When caching is active, Hummingbird adds a notification at the bottom of the HTML document:

“Hummingbird cache file was created in …”

Performance Comparison: Hummingbird vs. No WordPress Cache Plugin

Conclusion

Hummingbird provides a significant improvement in server response time (TTFB) and overall load time, mainly by reducing the number of HTTP requests and file sizes.

Negative Points

However, the plugin slightly worsens some visual performance metrics such as First Contentful Paint (FCP), Largest Contentful Paint (LCP), and Start Render. This means the initial rendering of elements is slower, which may affect the user’s perceived speed of the site.

Note: The tests were conducted using Hummingbird version 3.12.0.

WP Super Cache: Test and Analysis

Installation and Configuration

After installing WP Super Cache, a new submenu titled “WP Super Cache” appears under the Settings section in the WordPress admin panel.

Enabling the cache is very simple—just check a box to activate it.

For those looking for more control and flexibility, the “Advanced” tab offers additional settings, which I explored to further optimize performance.

The “Simple” mode uses PHP to generate and serve cached pages. The “Advanced” mode utilizes Apache redirects via the .htaccess file, which is faster but may require manual file modifications.

Settings Enabled for Testing

• Advanced caching mode
• Page compression
• Additional verification for the homepage

Before running the tests, I inspected the HTML source code to ensure the plugin was functioning properly. WP Super Cache adds a message at the bottom of the code:

“Cached page generated by WP-Super-Cache…”

Performance Comparison: WP Super Cache vs. No WordPress Cache Plugin

Conclusion

WP Super Cache significantly improves server response time (TTFB) and reduces overall load time. However, it does not reduce the number of HTTP requests or the size of transferred files.

Negative Points

• It slightly worsens First Contentful Paint (FCP) and Largest Contentful Paint (LCP), meaning the initial rendering is a bit slower.
• Unlike some other cache plugins, it does not optimize file sizes or reduce the number of requests.

WP Super Cache is an excellent choice for those prioritizing server speed and overall load time reduction. However, for better visual performance, it could be combined with a separate CSS/JS optimization solution.

Note: The tests were conducted using WP Super Cache version 2.0.0.

LiteSpeed Cache: Test and Analysis

Installation and Activation

Activating LiteSpeed Cache added a new menu to the WordPress sidebar. Unlike other cache plugins, there was no clear indication if caching was enabled or not. After exploring the interface, I found that public and private cache were enabled by default.

The plugin offers several predefined configuration levels, ranging from “Essential” to “Extreme”, depending on the desired level of optimization. I selected “Extreme” mode, then manually reviewed all available options to fine-tune the settings.

Key Configurations Enabled

• Generated a domain key to use QUIC.cloud services (free option).
• Added the server’s IP address to speed up requests, as recommended by the plugin.
• Database optimization, which removed 247 unnecessary entries.
• Automatic image optimization via QUIC.cloud (enabled by default).

I let the image optimization process complete before running the tests to ensure the best possible results without using paid services.

Issues Encountered

• Test Execution Problems: Among all the tested cache plugins, LiteSpeed Cache caused the most errors. Multiple times, Google PageSpeed Insights failed to generate results, forcing me to restart the tests.
• Dependency on a LiteSpeed Server: The plugin appears to be optimized for LiteSpeed servers rather than Apache or Nginx. On standard hosting environments, performance results were inconsistent, and some optimizations were less effective.
• Detected JavaScript Errors: During testing, multiple JavaScript errors appeared in Chrome DevTools, which could impact site stability.

Performance Comparison: LiteSpeed Cache vs. No WordPress Cache Plugin

Conclusion

LiteSpeed Cache provides strong optimizations in:

• Reducing the number of HTTP requests.
• Compressing CSS/JS files, significantly decreasing the amount of transferred data.
• Improving the loading time of main elements (FCP and LCP).
• Drastically reducing Total Blocking Time (TBT), enhancing page fluidity.

Negative Points

• Severe Cumulative Layout Shift (CLS) – The page layout shifts significantly, which can make the site feel unstable.
• Extremely long final load time (42s) – This suggests a compatibility issue or poor resource management.
• Multiple JavaScript errors detected – These could impact user experience and cause instability.
• LiteSpeed dependency – The plugin appears designed primarily for LiteSpeed servers and performs inconsistently on Apache or Nginx.

Verdict

LiteSpeed Cache can be an excellent solution if your server runs on LiteSpeed. However, in a standard hosting environment, its performance is inconsistent, and it introduces stability and display issues.

Note: The tests were conducted using LiteSpeed Cache version 6.5.4.

WP Fastest Cache: Test and Analysis

Installation and Activation

Activating WP Fastest Cache added a new option in the WordPress sidebar. The interface is clean and intuitive, with a list of features easily enabled via checkboxes.

However, I encountered a particular issue:

To enable caching, the plugin required disabling the cookie consent banner. I had to: disable the cookie extension, activate WP Fastest Cache, reactivate the cookie banner, and manually clear the cache. Once this was done, the site worked correctly, but this process is more complex than with other plugins.

Note: Image and database optimization tools are only available in the premium version.

Performance Comparison: WP Fastest Cache vs. No WordPress Cache Plugin

Conclusion

WP Fastest Cache significantly improves:

• Server response time (TTFB) by 443%, making the first connection to the server much faster.
• Overall page loading speed, enhancing user experience.
• Cumulative Layout Shift (CLS) reduction by 100%, ensuring a stable layout.

Negative Point

• Total transferred file size increased (+8%), which may slow down users on mobile networks or slower connections.
• Initial rendering (FCP, LCP) is slightly slower, which could affect perceived page speed.
• Requires extra steps with the cookie banner, making activation more complicated for some sites.
• No image or database optimization in the free version.

Verdict

WP Fastest Cache is very effective at improving server responsiveness and reducing total load time. However, it does not optimize file sizes or reduce the number of requests as much as other plugins.

Note: The tests were conducted using WP Fastest Cache version 1.3.4.

Cache Enabler: Test and Analysis

Installation and Activation

Activating Cache Enabler adds a submenu under the Settings tab in WordPress.

Unlike other cache plugins, its minimalist interface allows for quick and intuitive installation without complex configurations.

While the lack of extensive options makes it easy to use, it could also limit its optimization capabilities. Let’s see if this simplicity affects performance.

Performance Comparison: Cache Enabler vs. No WordPress Cache Plugin

Conclusion

Cache Enabler significantly improves:

• Server response time (TTFB), making the initial loading much faster.
• First Contentful Paint (FCP) and Largest Contentful Paint (LCP), improving the perceived speed for visitors.
• Overall load time, reducing the time before users can interact with the site.

Negative Points

• Does not reduce the number of HTTP requests or file size, meaning no improvement for slower connections.
• Minimal impact on Total Blocking Time (TBT), so JavaScript optimization is lacking.

Verdict

Cache Enabler is a simple and effective solution that significantly enhances site responsiveness. However, its lack of file optimization and request reduction may limit its effectiveness for complex or resource-heavy websites.

Note: The tests were conducted using Cache Enabler version 1.8.15.

W3 Total Cache: Test and Analysis

Installation and Configuration

W3 Total Cache is a well-known plugin due to its extensive options and advanced configuration. It is often considered difficult to set up, but it offers several interesting features:

• Native Object Cache (caching PHP queries to the database).
• Supports Redis and Memcached without needing additional extensions.

Once activated, W3 Total Cache adds a “Performance” menu in the WordPress sidebar.

Configuration Method Used

1. Wizard Setup – I followed the setup assistant to apply basic settings.
2. Advanced Optimization – I manually adjusted certain sections for better performance.
3. Built-in Optimization Tests – The plugin tested different caching methods and recommended the best one.
4. CSS/JS Minification & Combination – Enabled after initial setup to reduce resource sizes.

Performance Comparison: W3 Total Cache vs. No WordPress Cache Plugin

Conclusion

W3 Total Cache significantly improves:

• Server response time (TTFB) by 434%, making the first connection to the server much faster.
• Overall page loading speed, enhancing site responsiveness.
• A slight improvement in CLS, ensuring a more stable layout.

Negative Points

• Does not optimize HTTP requests or resource weight, limiting its efficiency for heavy sites.
• Minimal impact on FCP and LCP, meaning the initial content rendering is not significantly faster.
• More complex configuration than other plugins, which can be a barrier for less experienced users.

Verdict

W3 Total Cache is a solid solution for improving server response time and overall site speed. However, it is not ideal for optimizing static files and requires advanced configuration to be fully effective.

Note: The tests were conducted using W3 Total Cache version 2.8.5.

The Winners: What is the Top 3 Cache Plugin in 2025?

To determine the best WordPress cache plugin in 2025, I eliminated criteria related to the number of requests and the size of transferred files.

Why?

Many modern themes and plugins already optimize file sizes and reduce the number of requests by combining CSS/JS resources. By removing these factors, I focused only on the metrics that directly impact loading speed:

• ✅ Server response time (TTFB)
• ✅ Overall loading time
• ✅ Display smoothness (FCP, LCP, CLS, TBT)

Top 3 Standout WordPress Cache Plugin

Based solely on measurable performance gains, the top three WordPress cache plugins are:

1. Cache Enabler
2. W3 Total Cache
3. WP Fastest Cache

These WordPress cache plugins provided the best improvements in server response time, loading speed, and rendering stability, making them the most effective choices for optimizing WordPress performance in 2025.

Key Performance Comparison

Results Analysis

1. 🥇 Cache Enabler: Best Balance Between Speed and Display
   • Fastest initial display with FCP at 3.13s (best result).
   • Good LCP at 4.66s, ensuring a better user perception.
   • Slightly slower final load time compared to WP Fastest Cache (4.62s vs. 3.72s).
2. 🥈 WP Fastest Cache: Best for Overall Load Time
   • Fastest final load time at 3.72s.
   • Excellent TTFB (0.49s), making the server highly responsive.
   • Lowest Total Blocking Time (TBT) at 1.93s, ensuring smooth interactions.
   • Slightly slower FCP and LCP compared to Cache Enabler and W3 Total Cache.
3. 🥉 W3 Total Cache: Best Compromise Between Speed and Compatibility
   • Lowest TTFB (0.497s), making the server very responsive.
   • Balanced between initial display and overall load time.
   • Slower final load time compared to WP Fastest Cache.

The Best Choice: Cache Enabler

Why is Cache Enabler the Best WordPress Cache Plugin in 2025?

• Significantly improves the display time of visible elements (FCP and LCP).
• Excellent server response time (TTFB).
• Among the best global loading times.
• Offers a great balance between speed and display smoothness.

While WP Fastest Cache is slightly faster in TTFB and final load time, Cache Enabler remains the best choice because it provides a better user experience by displaying visible elements faster.

Final Verdict: If you’re looking for a WordPress cache plugin that is simple, fast, and effective, Cache Enabler is the best option in 2025!

Conclusion

The world of WordPress cache plugins is constantly evolving, as are the optimization methods used to speed up website loading times.

In this comparison, I selected the most popular caching plugins and conducted a series of objective tests to determine the best solution for 2025.

• Transparency and Verifiability: All data collected during these tests is available for download, so anyone can analyze and verify the results.
• Open to Discussion: If you have suggestions, different opinions, or want to share your own experience, feel free to leave a comment.

If there are errors or significant changes, I will update this article and publish any necessary corrections.

Thank you for reading this analysis—I hope it helps you choose the best cache plugin for your WordPress site in 2025!

Have you tried any of these cache plugins? Share your experiences in the comments below!