Should I convert OTF to WOFF2 for web use?

Yes, always convert OTF to WOFF2 for websites. WOFF2 provides 60-70% compression while maintaining all OpenType features.

Does WOFF2 support all OTF features?

Yes, WOFF2 preserves all OpenType features including ligatures, stylistic sets, contextual alternates, and kerning tables.

Which format loads faster on websites?

WOFF2 loads 3-5x faster than OTF due to Brotli compression. A 200KB OTF becomes ~60-80KB WOFF2.

Can I use OTF directly on websites?

Technically yes, browsers support it, but it's inefficient. OTF files are 3-5x larger than WOFF2, hurting page speed and Core Web Vitals.

Is the conversion from OTF to WOFF2 reversible?

WOFF2 to OTF conversion is possible but keep your original OTF as the source file for editing and professional use.

OTF vs WOFF2: Complete Format Comparison

Comprehensive comparison of OpenType Font (OTF) and Web Open Font Format 2 (WOFF2) covering Brotli compression, performance gains, browser support, and conversion best practices

TL;DR

In Simple Terms

OTF is desktop format (~168 KB), WOFF2 is compressed web format (~53 KB). Different purposes: OTF for local installation, WOFF2 for web delivery.WOFF2 achieves 68% file size reduction from OTF using Brotli compression. Use OTF as source file, convert to WOFF2 for web.Optimal workflow: Keep OTF for design work, convert to WOFF2 (primary, 97%+ support) + WOFF (fallback) for web deployment.

Summarize this page with:

ChatGPT Perplexity Claude Grok AI Google AI

Share this page to:

LinkedIn Reddit

In this article

OpenType Font (OTF) and Web Open Font Format 2 (WOFF2) represent the endpoints of modern web font optimization: OTF as the high-quality desktop source format and WOFF2 as the ultimate web delivery format with industry-leading compression. OTF, jointly developed by Adobe and Microsoft in 1996, stores font data uncompressed for direct operating system access, typically 150-300 KB for Latin fonts. WOFF2, released by W3C in 2018, applies Google's Brotli compression algorithm to OpenType data, achieving 30-50% better compression than WOFF (zlib), reducing typical file sizes from 168 KB (OTF) to 53 KB (WOFF2)—a dramatic 68% reduction with zero visual quality loss.

The critical distinction between these formats is purpose and optimization level. OTF is designed for desktop installation where file size is secondary to direct access speed—operating systems read uncompressed tables instantly. WOFF2 is engineered for web delivery where every kilobyte impacts load time and user experience. WOFF2 contains identical font data to OTF (same glyphs, hinting, kerning, OpenType features) but wraps it in Brotli-compressed format optimized for HTTP transfer. This makes OTF the master format for design workflows and desktop applications, while WOFF2 is the deployment format for modern websites with 97%+ browser support as of 2025.

This comprehensive guide compares OTF and WOFF2 to clarify their relationship and optimal usage patterns. You'll learn the technical specifications of both formats, how Brotli compression achieves superior results, detailed browser compatibility showing WOFF2's near-universal support, performance comparisons quantifying real-world load time improvements, conversion workflows from OTF to WOFF2, and best practices for implementing WOFF2 with proper fallbacks. Whether optimizing website performance or planning font delivery strategies, this guide provides essential knowledge for leveraging both formats effectively in modern web development.

Format Overview

OpenType Font (OTF)

History and Purpose:

• Created by Adobe and Microsoft (1996) to unify font formats
• Designed for desktop operating systems and applications
• Supports both TrueType and PostScript outline data
• Industry standard for professional typography
• Master format for design and development

Technical Characteristics:

• Uncompressed binary format
• Table-based structure (GPOS, GSUB, glyf, etc.)
• Advanced typography features (ligatures, kerning, alternates)
• Direct OS-level access to font tables
• Extensions: .otf (PostScript) or .ttf (TrueType)

Typical Specifications:

• File size: 150-300 KB (Latin fonts)
• Use case: Desktop installation, design work
• Platform: Windows, macOS, Linux
• Status: Current standard for desktop

Web Open Font Format 2 (WOFF2)

History and Purpose:

• Developed by Google, Mozilla, Opera
• W3C Recommendation (2018)
• Successor to WOFF with better compression
• Uses Google's Brotli compression algorithm
• Current best practice for web font delivery

Technical Characteristics:

• Brotli-compressed OpenType data
• 30-50% better compression than WOFF (zlib)
• Preserves all OpenType features and data
• Optimized table ordering for web delivery
• Extension: .woff2

Typical Specifications:

• File size: 50-100 KB (68% smaller than OTF)
• Use case: Web font delivery, web apps
• Browser support: 97%+ (all modern browsers)
• Status: Industry standard for web (2025)

Key Evolution: WOFF → WOFF2

WOFF2 represents the next generation of web font compression:

WOFF (2012): Uses zlib compression, ~46% smaller than OTF
WOFF2 (2018): Uses Brotli compression, ~68% smaller than OTF
Improvement: WOFF2 is 40-42% smaller than WOFF
Adoption: 97%+ browser support makes WOFF2 the primary format
Recommendation: Use WOFF2 first, WOFF as fallback

Technical Differences

Comprehensive Comparison Table

Feature	OTF	WOFF2
Primary Use	Desktop OS, apps	Web delivery
Compression	None	Brotli (best-in-class)
File Size	168 KB (baseline)	53 KB (68% smaller)
Font Data	Raw OpenType tables	Identical tables, compressed
Quality	Perfect	Identical (lossless)
Browser Support	Works but not optimal	97%+ (recommended)
Load Time (4G)	~1.1s	~0.35s (68% faster)
Desktop Install	Yes (native)	No (web only)
Best Practice	Desktop, source files	Web deployment

Same Font Data, Different Packaging

Critical understanding: WOFF2 contains 100% identical font data to OTF—only the compression differs.

• Identical glyphs: Same curves, same visual appearance
• Identical features: All OpenType features preserved
• Identical metrics: Same spacing, kerning, line height
• Identical hinting: Same rendering instructions
• Lossless conversion: No quality degradation whatsoever

The 68% file size reduction comes purely from Brotli compression, not data removal.

Table Structure Optimization

WOFF2 includes additional optimizations beyond compression:

• Table reordering: Places frequently-accessed tables first
• Glyph preprocessing: Optimizes glyph data before compression
• Transformation: Converts some tables to more compressible formats
• Dictionary sharing: Shares common data between tables
• Result: Better compression than simply applying Brotli to OTF

Compression Technology

Brotli vs zlib Compression

WOFF2's compression advantage comes from Brotli algorithm:

WOFF (zlib):

• Older compression (1995)
• Good compression ratio
• 168 KB → 90 KB (46% reduction)
• Fast decompression

WOFF2 (Brotli):

• Modern compression (2013)
• Excellent compression ratio
• 168 KB → 53 KB (68% reduction)
• Still fast decompression

Compression Comparison Chart

Example: Roboto Regular (Latin character set)

Format	Compression	Size	vs OTF
OTF/TTF	None	168 KB	Baseline
WOFF	zlib	90 KB	46% smaller
WOFF2	Brotli	53 KB	68% smaller

WOFF2 vs WOFF: 53 KB vs 90 KB = 41% additional savings

Why Brotli Performs Better

Larger dictionary: 16 MB sliding window vs zlib's 32 KB
Static dictionary: Pre-built dictionary of common patterns
Better entropy coding: More efficient symbol representation
Context modeling: Understands font data structure
Optimized for fonts: Specially tuned for OpenType data

Browser Compatibility

Browser Support Matrix (2025)

Browser	WOFF2	Version	Notes
Chrome	✓	36+ (2014)	Full support
Safari	✓	10+ (2016)	Full support
Firefox	✓	39+ (2015)	Full support
Edge	✓	14+ (2016)	Full support
Opera	✓	23+ (2014)	Full support
iOS Safari	✓	10+ (2016)	Full support
Android	✓	5+ (2015)	Full support
IE 11	✗	Never	Use WOFF fallback

Global Coverage: 97%+ of users can use WOFF2 (Can I Use, 2025)

Recommended Font Stack (2025)

@font-face {
  font-family: 'MyFont';
  src: url('/fonts/font.woff2') format('woff2'),
       url('/fonts/font.woff') format('woff');
  font-weight: 400;
  font-style: normal;
  font-display: swap;
}

/* Priority:
   1. WOFF2 (97%+ users, best compression)
   2. WOFF (fallback for IE11, older mobile)
   
   OTF/TTF not needed for web (not optimized) */

This two-format approach covers 99%+ users with optimal performance.

When WOFF Fallback is Still Needed

• IE 11 support: If required by stakeholders (rare in 2025)
• Very old mobile: Android 4.4, iOS 9 and earlier
• Enterprise intranets: Some corporations stuck on old browsers
• Cost: Minimal—WOFF adds 37 KB (90 KB vs 53 KB)
• Recommendation: Include WOFF as safety net

Performance and File Size

Load Time Comparison

Format	Size	3G	4G	Savings
OTF	168 KB	~3.4s	~1.1s	Baseline
WOFF	90 KB	~1.8s	~0.6s	46% faster
WOFF2	53 KB	~1.1s	~0.35s	68% faster

Real-World Impact Example

Scenario: Website with 4 font files (Regular, Bold, Italic, Bold Italic)

Using OTF:

• 4 × 168 KB = 672 KB
• 4G load: ~4.5s
• 3G load: ~13.4s

Using WOFF:

• 4 × 90 KB = 360 KB
• 4G load: ~2.4s
• Saves 312 KB, 2.1s

Using WOFF2:

• 4 × 53 KB = 212 KB
• 4G load: ~1.4s
• Saves 460 KB, 3.1s

Result: WOFF2 delivers 68% bandwidth savings and dramatically faster font loading.

Core Web Vitals Impact

Using WOFF2 instead of OTF significantly improves web performance metrics:

• FCP (First Contentful Paint): Faster font load = text renders 1-3s sooner
• LCP (Largest Contentful Paint): If text is largest element, major improvement
• CLS (Cumulative Layout Shift): Faster load with font-display: swap reduces shift
• PageSpeed score: Typically 15-40 point improvement
• Mobile experience: Critical for 3G/4G connections—3.1s faster

Conversion Workflow

Converting OTF to WOFF2

Method 1: FontTools (Recommended)

# Install FontTools with Brotli support
pip install fonttools brotli

# Convert OTF to WOFF2
fonttools ttLib.woff2 compress font.otf
# Output: font.woff2

# Convert OTF to WOFF (fallback)
fonttools ttLib.woff compress font.otf
# Output: font.woff

# Batch convert all fonts in directory
for file in *.otf; do
  fonttools ttLib.woff2 compress "$file"
  fonttools ttLib.woff compress "$file"
done

Method 2: Online Converter

Visit font-converters.com
Upload OTF file(s)
Select WOFF2 and WOFF as output
Download converted files

Complete Implementation Workflow

Obtain OTF fonts: Purchase or download from foundries/Google Fonts
Verify licensing: Ensure web embedding rights
Optional subsetting: If large, subset to required characters only
Convert to WOFF2: Primary format for modern browsers
Convert to WOFF: Fallback for IE11 and old mobile
Upload to /fonts/: Place files on web server or CDN
Implement @font-face: Add CSS declarations
Configure caching: Set 1-year cache headers
Add font-display: Use swap to prevent FOIT
Test thoroughly: Chrome, Safari, Firefox, mobile
Monitor performance: PageSpeed Insights, WebPageTest

Production-Ready CSS Template

/* Preload critical font for faster FCP */
<link rel="preload" href="/fonts/font.woff2" as="font" 
      type="font/woff2" crossorigin>

/* Font declaration with WOFF2 first, WOFF fallback */
@font-face {
  font-family: 'MyFont';
  src: url('/fonts/font.woff2') format('woff2'),
       url('/fonts/font.woff') format('woff');
  font-weight: 400;
  font-style: normal;
  font-display: swap; /* Prevent FOIT */
}

/* Usage with fallback stack */
body {
  font-family: 'MyFont', -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, 
               'Segoe UI', Roboto, sans-serif;
}

Best Practices Checklist

☐ Keep original OTF as source files
☐ Convert to WOFF2 for primary delivery
☐ Convert to WOFF for IE11 fallback
☐ Never serve OTF directly to web browsers
☐ Use font-display: swap to prevent invisible text
☐ Configure 1-year cache headers (max-age=31536000)
☐ Consider subsetting for large fonts or limited character sets
☐ Preload 1-2 critical fonts only
☐ Limit to 2-4 font files per page
☐ Test in Chrome DevTools Network tab
☐ Verify PageSpeed score 90+
☐ Test on real mobile devices

Summary: OTF vs WOFF2

OTF and WOFF2 serve complementary roles in modern web development: OTF as the uncompressed desktop format and source file, WOFF2 as the optimal web delivery format. WOFF2 uses Google's Brotli compression to reduce OTF files by 68% (168 KB → 53 KB) while preserving 100% identical font data—same glyphs, features, metrics, and hinting. This compression is lossless, meaning no visual quality degradation whatsoever.

Use OTF for desktop installation and as master files for font management. Convert OTF to WOFF2 for web deployment—this reduces load times by 68% (from 1.1s to 0.35s on 4G), improving Core Web Vitals and user experience. WOFF2 has 97%+ browser support; include WOFF fallback for IE11 if needed. Never serve OTF directly to websites. The modern standard is WOFF2 first, WOFF fallback, with OTF kept as source files. This approach delivers maximum performance with universal compatibility.

Written & Verified by

Sarah Mitchell

Product Designer, Font Specialist

OTF vs WOFF2 FAQs

Common questions answered about this font format comparison