What is JPEG XL, exactly?
JPEG XL is a modern, royalty-free image format (ISO/IEC 18181) designed as a single replacement for both PNG and JPEG. Unlike most formats, it does both jobs well: a mathematically lossless mode that competes with — and usually beats — PNG on file size, and a high-quality lossy mode that competes with JPEG and WebP. It also supports progressive decoding, alpha transparency, very high bit depths, wide color gamuts, and HDR. PNG, by comparison, is lossless-only and far older.
PNG vs JPEG XL at a glance
| Feature | PNG | JPEG XL |
|---|---|---|
| Lossless | Yes | Yes (smaller than PNG) |
| Lossy | No | Yes |
| Progressive decoding | Interlacing only | Yes, refined |
| HDR / wide gamut | Limited | Yes |
| Browser support (2026) | Universal | Limited, inconsistent |
| Best for | Web, sharing, anything | Archival, controlled pipelines |
How much better is JPEG XL's compression?
For lossless images, JPEG XL typically produces noticeably smaller files than PNG — often a substantial reduction on the same artwork, with no quality loss. It can also losslessly transcode an existing JPEG into a smaller JXL and convert it back bit-for-bit, which is valuable for re-compressing large photo libraries without re-encoding artifacts. Add progressive decoding and HDR support and, on pure capability, JXL is the more advanced format by a wide margin.
So what's the catch?
Browser support. As of 2026 it remains limited and inconsistent: Safari ships native JPEG XL support, Firefox keeps it behind a configuration flag rather than on by default, and Chrome removedits experimental flag and does not enable JXL out of the box — a decision that drew sustained pushback from developers. The practical result is that you can't serve a JXL image and trust every visitor to see it. That single gap is what keeps JPEG XL out of mainstream web use, however strong the format is technically.
When should you use each?
Use PNGfor anything that must display reliably for every visitor — it's the universal lossless baseline. Consider JPEG XL for archival storage, internal tooling, or apps where you fully control the decoder. If you want smaller images on the web today without the support gamble, a well-supported modern format like WebP is the pragmatic middle ground — try PNG to WebP. And if a PNG is simply too large, you can often shrink it in place with compress PNG.
The honest verdict
JPEG XL is, by most measures, the better format — and it may well be the future. But "better on paper" and "safe to ship on the open web" are different things, and as of 2026 the inconsistent browser support means JXL is not yet web-ready everywhere. For now, PNG stays the dependable universal choice. If you want a refresher on why PNG is so widely trusted, read what a PNG is, or browse every converter on the tools page.
Frequently asked questions
- Is JPEG XL better than PNG?
- Technically, yes — JPEG XL offers smaller lossless files than PNG plus lossy, HDR, and progressive decoding. The catch is reach: as of 2026 browser support is limited and inconsistent, so PNG still wins for anything that must display everywhere.
- Can browsers display JPEG XL in 2026?
- Support is patchy. Safari added native JPEG XL support, Firefox keeps it behind a flag, and Chrome removed its experimental flag and does not ship it by default. That inconsistency is the main reason JXL isn't web-ready everywhere.
- Is JPEG XL royalty-free?
- Yes. JPEG XL is an open, royalty-free standard (ISO/IEC 18181), which removes the licensing concerns that dogged some other modern formats.
- Should I convert my PNGs to JPEG XL now?
- Not for the open web yet — too many browsers can't render it reliably. JXL makes sense for archival, controlled pipelines, or apps you fully control. For the web, PNG or a well-supported modern format like WebP remains the safer choice.