Side-by-side comparison · 24 data points
| f(x) Builder | STAX Header Builder | |
|---|---|---|
| Tagline | — | — |
| Description | ||
| Screenshots | — | — |
| Languages | ||
| Platforms | ||
| Developer | ||
| Listed | — | — |
| Last updated | — | — |
| Metric | f(x) Builder | STAX Header Builder |
|---|---|---|
| Rating | ★ 5.0 ★ | 4.7 ★ |
| Total reviews | 5 | ★ 9 |
| Active installs | 20+ | 300+ |
| Free plan | — | — |
f(x) Builder edges out STAX Header Builder on rating (5.0★ vs 4.7★), but the gap is small enough that pricing fit and feature differentiation should drive the decision more than the headline number.
Recommended by size: small/early-stage site owners who need fast install and low risk should default to f(x) Builder; mid-market and enterprise site owners with specific feature requirements should evaluate both — STAX Header Builder's 9-review base may include the workflow context that matches your specific use case better than f(x) Builder's broader-but-shallower coverage.
This verdict is generated from the live marketplace data on this page — rating, review count, pricing tier, and category position all refresh from the canonical WordPress Plugin Directory listing every 24 hours. AppRanks does not accept payment to influence comparison outcomes; the methodology is documented on the About page and applies identically to every pair on the site.
Read each app's audit: f(x) Builder audit • STAX Header Builder audit
f(x) Builder has the higher average rating (5.0★ from 5 reviews) compared to STAX Header Builder (4.7★ from 9 reviews). Both are tracked daily by AppRanks, so the figures here update each refresh cycle.
f(x) Builder holds the higher average rating (5.0★ vs 4.7★). That is the one dimension AppRanks can separate them on here — read both apps' detail pages for the feature breakdown and recent listing changes.
Both apps are one-click installs from the WordPress Plugin Directory. STAX Header Builder has the deeper published review base (9 vs 5), which often — though not always — accompanies better-tested setup docs. AppRanks doesn't measure setup time directly: read the recent reviews on each app's detail page for user-reported install experience.
f(x) Builder typically suits early-stage and growth-mode teams based on its published review base (5 reviews). STAX Header Builder typically suits early-stage and growth-mode teams based on its published review base (9 reviews). A larger review base generally means the app has been exercised at scale — relevant if you are processing high volume or handling enterprise compliance requirements.
Migration support varies by app and category. f(x) Builder and STAX Header Builder both publish their export options on their marketplace listing pages (or in their support docs); some apps offer one-click import from competitors, others require CSV. The fastest check: search "import from f(x) Builder" in each app's help center. AppRanks does not track migration tooling directly — this is a category-specific capability worth verifying before commitment.
