Given the benchmarks:

Small static file (174 B) - the bread and butter of static sites:

server req/s p99

zeroserve 36,681 5.4 ms

nginx 31,226 7.8 ms

Caddy 12,830 22 ms

zeroserve serves small files about 17% faster than nginx on a single core, with a tighter tail. HTML pages, small JSON, CSS - this is the case zeroserve is tuned for.

Large static file (100 KB):

server req/s throughput p99

zeroserve 8,000 782 MB/s 22 ms

nginx 7,600 773 MB/s 28 ms

Caddy 6,084 590 MB/s 44 ms

I'd go with a more storied project that's been audited, battle tested, hardened etc than this upstart. There's not enough improvement to justify the risk.

The problem with pasting LLM output is that no human with sound mind and body would waste their finite time on this Earth informing you that small static files are "the bread and butter of static sites".