Convert JPG to WebP
Output is typically about 34% smaller.
- Files stay on your device
- Free, no sign-up
Related tools
All image toolsQuestions
Should I serve WebP to everyone, or keep JPEG fallbacks?
Serve WebP to everyone. Global support passed 97% years ago and the browsers that lack it are old enough to struggle with a modern site regardless. Keep the JPEG originals in your asset store — not as a runtime fallback, but so you can re-export if you later change your mind about quality.
Will converting JPG to WebP make the file smaller?
Usually, yes. A 12-megapixel photo is around 3.2 MB as JPG and around 2.1 MB as WebP — about 34% smaller. Because WebP is lossless the result depends entirely on the image content — flat colour and text compress far better than photographic detail.
Does converting JPG to WebP lose quality?
Slightly. Re-encoding one lossy format as another means a second round of compression, which can soften fine detail. In practice the loss is hard to see at high quality settings, and WebP's newer codec often preserves detail better than the JPG original did. Keep quality at 80 or above and the difference will not be visible at normal viewing size.
Is WebP safe to use on a live website?
Yes. Every browser in current use supports it — Chrome since 2014, Firefox since 2019, and Safari since version 14 in 2020. Coverage is above 97% of global traffic. The remaining gap is older desktop software and some print workflows, so keep a JPEG or PNG original if the image also has to leave the web.
How it works, and more about jpg to webp
How it works
- Add your JPG file. Drag a JPG file onto the drop zone, or click to browse. You can select several at once.
- Choose your settings. Adjust the quality slider if you want a smaller file or a sharper result. 80 suits most photographs.
- Download the WebP. Conversion runs on your device as soon as each file is added — no upload, no queue. Download each result when it is ready.
Why people convert JPG to WebP
Usually a bulk job — a folder of photos for a website, a portfolio or a product catalogue, where total page weight is the problem rather than any single image.
One of the clearest wins in image tooling: comparable visual quality at a substantially smaller size, supported by every current browser. Add all the files at once; each is processed on your device in turn, so a large batch costs you nothing but time.
Worth knowing: You are re-encoding already-lossy data, so keep quality at 80 or above and always convert from the largest original you have. Converting a JPEG that has already been shrunk once compounds the damage.
JPG and WebP side by side
| JPG | WebP | |
|---|---|---|
| Full name | JPEG | WebP |
| Compression | Lossy | Lossy or lossless |
| Transparency | No | Yes — alpha channel |
| Animation | No | Yes, in the format |
| Browser support | Universal — every browser, every device | All modern browsers — Chrome 32+, Firefox 65+, Safari 14+ (2020), Edge 18+ |
| Typical 12 MP photo | ~3.2 MB | ~2.1 MB |
| Usually used for | Photographs, email attachments and anything needing maximum compatibility | Web images where page weight matters and modern browsers are the audience |
On a typical 12-megapixel phone photo, the WebP output comes out about 34% smaller than the JPG original. These are order-of-magnitude figures for one kind of image — your own results will vary a great deal, because flat colour, text and line art behave nothing like photographic detail, and the quality slider moves the figure substantially.
What this tool actually produces
Not estimates. Each row below was produced by running the file through this page in a real browser and measuring the result, at the default quality of 82.
| Test image | JPG in | WebP out | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Smooth gradient 1600 × 1200, broad tonal transitions — where banding and blocking show | 236 KB | 174 KB | -26% |
| UI screenshot 1440 × 900, dense text on flat panels — the hardest case for JPEG | 159 KB | 46 KB | -71% |
| Line-art diagram 1200 × 800, hard edges and large flat areas | 83 KB | 10 KB | -88% |
Every test image got smaller, though by very different margins — flat colour and text behave nothing like photographic detail, so treat the closest row to your own content as the useful one. Measured in Chrome 150.0.7871.46; other browsers encode slightly differently.
What to watch out for
- Not accepted by some older desktop software and print workflows
- Slightly slower to encode than JPEG
- Larger than AVIF at the same quality
About the two formats
JPEG has been the default photo format for three decades, and its compatibility is unmatched — if a device can display an image at all, it can display a JPEG. The trade-offs are that it discards detail permanently on every save, and it has no transparency channel at all, so anything transparent becomes a solid background.
WebP is the pragmatic modern choice for the web: roughly 25–35% smaller than JPEG at comparable quality, with transparency and animation that JPEG lacks, and — since Safari 14 in 2020 — support in every browser that matters. It is the format to reach for when you want smaller pages without worrying about fallbacks.
Other conversions
Everything runs on your device — nothing is uploaded, so there is no size limit, no queue and no copy left on a server afterwards. There is more on how browser-based conversion works if you want the detail. Otherwise, browse every image tool, or convert WebP back to JPG.