Summary

Timber and composite are the two dominant boundary fencing choices for UK domestic and light commercial work, and the decision between them is almost always a total-cost-of-ownership conversation rather than a straight like-for-like material swap. Timber close-board and panel fencing is the default — cheaper to buy, familiar to fit, and repairable board-by-board. Composite panel fencing has grown from a niche premium product into a mainstream option over roughly a decade, on the strength of one pitch: no annual maintenance, no re-staining, and a consistent factory finish that doesn't silver, warp, or split.

The comparison genuinely depends on how long the customer plans to stay in the property and how much they value not doing (or paying for) maintenance. A customer selling within five years gets little benefit from composite's 25-year service life. A customer settled long-term, or one who has explicitly said they don't want an ongoing garden maintenance task, is a strong composite candidate even at 1.5–2.5× the upfront material cost.

This article covers material specification, installation method differences (composite uses a channel-and-slot fixing system, not face-nailing), cost and lifecycle comparison, and how to have the value conversation with a customer who's only looking at the upfront price. It compares fencing panels specifically — for the equivalent comparison in decking boards, treat that as a separate product decision with its own span and joist-spacing rules; do not assume the fencing figures in this article transfer to a decking quote.

Key Facts

Quick Reference Table

Spending too long on quotes? squote turns a 2-minute voice recording into a professional quote.

Try squote free →
Factor Timber (close-board/panel) Composite (WPC, capped)
Supply cost per linear metre (1.8m height) £85–£140 £150–£300
Labour cost per linear metre £35–£60 £35–£65 (slightly higher — channel post setup)
Maintenance Re-treat/stain every 2–3 years None required — occasional wash down
Service life 15–25 years 25–30+ years
Colour options Can be re-stained any colour Fixed at manufacture — cannot be effectively repainted
Fixing method Nailed/screwed to arris rails or panel brackets Slots into post channel, concealed/colour-matched fixings
Post foundation Concrete-set, 600mm+ depth Identical — concrete-set, 600mm+ depth
Warping/splitting risk Moderate over 10+ years, especially in wet ground Very low with aluminium-cored posts
Cutting on site Standard timber sawdust Plastic-composite dust — needs PPE, dust extraction
Standard board/pale width 100mm (feather edge) or 1.83m panel 150–180mm
Governing standard BS 1722-5 (close-board), BS 8417 (treatment) BS EN 15534 (board material, no finished-product BS)
Planning permission threshold 2m (1m near highway) Identical — 2m (1m near highway)

Detailed Guidance

Cost and lifecycle — the real comparison

Timber wins on upfront material cost every time, typically by a factor of 1.5–2.5x against composite of comparable quality. Composite's case rests entirely on total cost of ownership: no re-staining labour every 2–3 years (typically £8–£15 per linear metre per treatment in materials and labour), a longer base service life before any replacement is needed, and a consistent appearance that doesn't require ongoing customer effort. Run the numbers over a 20-year horizon for a customer who's undecided — timber's repeated treatment cost and earlier replacement narrows the gap considerably against composite's higher upfront spend, and can flip the total-cost comparison in composite's favour depending on local labour rates and treatment frequency.

Installation differences — timber

Close-board timber fencing is built up on site: gravel board first, then posts set in concrete with morticed or face-fixed rail brackets, then arris rails (two rails up to 1.5m height, three rails at 1.5m and above), then individual feather-edge pales nailed or screwed across the rails with a 12–25mm overlap, finished with a capping rail. See timber close board fencing for the full sequence, timber and fixings specification, and feather edge fencing installation for pale-fixing detail. Pre-made panel fencing is faster to install — panels slot or bracket-fix between posts set at panel-width-plus-post-width centres (typically 1.85m for a 1.83m panel) — see fence panel quantity calculator for the panel and post quantity takeoff.

Installation differences — composite

Composite posts (ideally aluminium-cored for long-term straightness) are set and concreted exactly as for timber, checked plumb and level to the string line, then left to cure fully (typically 24–48 hours minimum for postcrete) before loading with boards. Boards do not get nailed through the face — each post has a routed channel or bolt-on U-channel bracket that the board tongue slides into. Working from the base, slide the first board into the channels on both sides, check it sits level, then continue board by board up the run, respecting the manufacturer's expansion gap at each post junction. Fit any top capping rail and secure end boards with the concealed clip or colour-matched screw system specified by the manufacturer.

Ground clearance and gravel boards — identical rule, different reason

Timber pales rot in 5–7 years if left in direct ground contact — the single biggest failure mode in close-board fencing. Composite doesn't rot, but continuous soil contact still traps moisture against the board and encourages algae and green staining on the lower courses, a cosmetic fault that generates complaints even though it isn't structural. Both materials need a gravel board (timber, concrete, or composite) giving 50mm minimum clearance between the lowest board and the ground. See concrete post gravel boards for gravel board specification shared between both systems.

Fixings — where the two materials genuinely diverge

Timber fixings follow a straightforward rule: galvanised or A2/A4 stainless steel, avoiding electroplated (yellow-passivated) fixings that fail within 2–3 years in damp timber. Composite has an additional trap: standard galvanised screws and clips can leach a grey-black stain onto lighter composite boards (grey, sand, driftwood tones) over a few years as the zinc coating weathers — a fault invisible at handover that appears 12–24 months later. Specify stainless steel (A2 minimum) or the manufacturer's own colour-matched fixing kit for any visible composite fixing point.

Having the cost conversation with a price-focused customer

Composite loses the upfront price comparison every time, so don't try to win that argument — reframe it around total cost of ownership and the maintenance the customer is actually willing to do. For a customer planning to stay in the property 10+ years, or one who has explicitly said they don't want an ongoing treatment task, the total-cost argument for composite is genuinely strong and worth quoting alongside the timber option rather than only on request. For a customer on a tight budget or planning to sell within a few years, timber close-board remains the more sensible spec — don't oversell composite where it doesn't fit the customer's actual situation and timeline.

Frequently Asked Questions

Does composite fencing need any treatment or maintenance at all?

No preservative treatment, staining, or painting is required on capped composite — this is the core selling point over timber. Manufacturers typically recommend an occasional wash down with water and mild detergent (not a close-range pressure washer, which can damage the surface finish) to remove surface dirt or algae, particularly on boards near ground level or in shaded, damp positions.

Can composite fencing be repainted or restained later if the customer wants a different colour?

Not effectively. Colour in composite boards is integral to the material — mixed through the extrusion or part of the capping layer — not a surface coating, so conventional paint or stain doesn't bond well and looks patchy. If a colour change is wanted later, board replacement is the realistic option rather than repainting. This is a genuine limitation compared to timber and worth flagging to customers who might want to change the look down the line.

Is composite as strong as timber in high wind?

Both perform comparably when specified and installed correctly — post spacing, foundation depth, and post section are the controlling factors for wind resistance in either material, not the board material itself. Aluminium-cored composite posts give better long-term straightness under load than solid composite or plastic posts, particularly on exposed or windy sites — specify aluminium-cored for any run with meaningful wind exposure.

How does the installation time compare between the two?

Broadly similar for the post-setting stage — identical concrete-and-cure process for both materials. Board fitting is sometimes slightly slower on composite systems where each board needs individual alignment into a channel, versus a continuous nailing run on timber pales. Budget a similar or marginally higher labour allowance for composite of the same run length.

Which is better for a boundary next to a neighbour's fence?

Neither material has a compliance advantage here — the deciding factors are the existing boundary agreement, which side the "good" (finished) face conventionally sits on (see timber close board fencing for the trade convention), and whether the neighbour has expressed a preference. Composite's consistent appearance can be an advantage where a customer wants a long-term, low-dispute boundary finish, but this is a customer-relationship consideration, not a technical or regulatory one.

Regulations & Standards