Performance / Core Web Vitals, does SaaS multi-tenancy matter?

Both can hit excellent CWV with engineering discipline. SaaS multi-tenancy is mostly neutral, it’s the architecture choices on top that matter.

SFCC defaults: SFRA-based stores hit Lighthouse mobile 75-85 out of the box. CDN edge is included (Salesforce’s eCDN), so static assets are fast globally. Performance ceiling: 90+ Lighthouse mobile with a clean SFRA cartridge stack and disciplined third-party tag management. Watch out: SFCC’s page generation is server-rendered and can be slow under heavy load if cartridges aren’t optimised.

Adobe Commerce defaults: Magento Luma sits at 45 Lighthouse mobile. With Hyvä theme (Tailwind + Alpine.js, ~95% less JS), it hits 95+. Adobe Commerce Cloud includes Fastly CDN, so static assets are also fast globally. Performance ceiling on AC + Hyvä is genuinely higher than SFCC defaults, but requires the Hyvä re-theme commitment ($25k, $80k).

Practical comparison: SFCC out-of-box > AC Luma out-of-box; AC + Hyvä > SFCC tuned. If CWV is a top-3 priority, AC + Hyvä is the strongest play. If you want fast defaults without a re-theme project, SFCC ships closer to that.