In my experience, it's competitive on output size but not on compression speed. If you're not compressing online then that's fine, but we're running a service that resizes and recompresses on the fly. We serve JXL if the client indicates support for it, JPEG using JXL's jpegli, WebP, or PNG, depending on various factors.
replyMuch worse at lossless at least.
replyDepends on who you listen to, or what you test it on. It goes either way, and avif is typically significantly better at small files sizes where loading speed (or saving data) is the priority.
replyDefinitely not with lossless. It consistently lose to JXL and WebP
replyOn lossless? No.
replyReally? The lossless comparisons I've seen has JXL winning over AVIF, do you have a link to the comparisons you've seen where AVIF wins in lossless?
reply