Make images smaller with WebP
Convert PNG or JPEG to WebP. Screenshots and graphics shrink the most; photos already in JPEG barely move.
Input
or click to choose
Images (JPG, PNG, WebP, HEIC, AVIF, GIF, SVG, BMP, ICO), audio (MP3, WAV, M4A, FLAC, OGG, Opus, AIFF) and video (MP4, MOV, WebM and more — audio extraction)
Result
Why these settings
The gain comes from PNG. PNG discards nothing, so screenshots and photos kept as PNG are large. WebP can compress lossily and still keep transparency — which is usually the reason a file was PNG in the first place. A screenshot with a transparent background can drop to a fraction of its size and still go everywhere it went before.
From JPEG there is far less to gain. A JPEG has already thrown away what it was going to throw away, and re-encoding it as WebP mostly re-describes what is left; depending on the original quality setting, the WebP can come out larger. Compare the two sizes afterwards and keep the JPEG if it won.
Quality is fixed at 92%. There is no slider because a slider gets dragged to the bottom, and that damage cannot be recovered from the file you are left with. If it is still too big, cut the pixel dimensions instead — fewer pixels at good quality looks better than the same pixels at bad quality.
WebP is not universally openable. Every current browser handles it, but older Windows photo viewers, internal business systems, print shops and whoever you email it to may not. For your own site it is safe; for a file you hand to someone else, JPEG or PNG is the safer answer.
Common questions
- Is transparency preserved?
- Yes. WebP supports an alpha channel, so a PNG with a transparent background stays transparent. That is the decisive difference from JPEG, which has no transparency at all and fills those areas with black or white. Images that were PNG *because* they needed transparency are exactly the ones with the most to gain here.
- Can I convert an animated GIF?
- Not on this page. This handles still images, and a GIF brought here converts its first frame only. WebP can hold animation as a format, but this tool does not write it. For moving content, treating it as video in the compressor gives you far more picture per byte anyway.
- Is WebP worth it for SEO or page speed?
- For page speed, yes — lighter images load sooner, and that feeds into the Core Web Vitals metrics search uses. But only when they actually get lighter. If re-encoding a JPEG as WebP saves a few percent, there is nothing there worth the effort. The wins are in replacing PNGs and in cutting pixel dimensions that were oversized to begin with.