I know very little about what makes a language "fast", but it stands to reason for me that a language designed for extreme minimalism would also be extremely fast, right?
C is far closer to English than BrainFuck, and the compiler size for BrainFuck is remarkably small at 1024 bytes, almost nothing compared to the Tiny C Compiler, which is sized at around 100 KB.
However, all the websites online treat C as the fastest language bar bytecode or assembly.
(Clarity edit to take question off hold)
If I made the same program in C and BrainFuck (which, for example, calculated the first 100 numbers of the fibonacci sequence) , which one will complete the task faster at runtime? Which one would compile faster?
Yes and no. There are language features that will make a language slower (in some cases garbage collection, dynamic types only known at runtime, …) and others that will make it more complex but allow the compiler more freedom.
Case in point: the constexpr keyword of C++ is somewhat complex to implement, but allows the programmer to tell the compiler "This function application has to be replaceable by its result". In extreme cases, this allows the compiler to replace costly function calls (e.g. a fast fourier transform) with a constant result without any runtime cost.
Compiled C code is very fast, because it has almost no features that don't map down directly to assembler and it has almost half a century of compiler optimizations.