>>106192000
For personal use both webp and jpeg-xl do a nice job of replacing GIF/PNG which practically speaking occupy the most space. Jpeg-xl is newer and obviously better but doesn't have the same level of browser/software support as webp. The reason google uses webp instead of Jpeg-xl seems to be backward compatibility and some say there's a conspiracy for google to control the web via webp but idk.
As for replacing JPG, it'll depend on the kind of images you have. Which means there is no "universal" image format. You'll just have to use one for some images and another for other images.
Outside of web use jpeg-xl + avif seems to be a pretty reasonable combo for like 80% of people with modern devices. Otherwise webp + JPG if you're using like a pentium 4.
One thing that really confuses me is if webp is even a significant improvement over JPG in general. Some tests show that it is but others not so much which probably sounds like it only compressed certain images better than JPG. If in doubt just use webp to replace PNG/GIF and keep using JPG for uhhh JPG.
