Latest Performance News

Netcraft Hosting Provider Performance Monitoring

Netcraft measures and makes available the response times of leading hosting providers' sites. The performance measurements are made at fifteen minute intervals from separate points around the internet, and averages are calculated over the immediately preceding 24 hour period.

Hosting Providers sites ordered by failures over the last 1 day, updated every 15 mins. 44 sites
Click on a column heading to sort by that column, click twice to reverse order.
Click the site name to see graphs of site performance.
FAQ
Rank Performance graph Company site OS Outage hh:mm:ss Failed Req% DNS Connect First byte Total Kb/s size(K)
1 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.144 0.009 0.264 0.308 1408 62
2 unknown  0:00:00  0.000  0.268 0.020 0.037 0.130 569 53
3 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.084 0.020 0.044 0.044 - 0
4 unknown  0:00:00  0.000  0.100 0.020 0.136 0.137 1885 1
5 FreeBSD  0:00:00  0.000  0.114 0.026 0.042 0.057 576 9
6 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.220 0.051 0.101 0.102 2507 3
7 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.275 0.051 0.104 0.104 - 0
8 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.165 0.052 0.108 0.137 361 10
9 unknown  0:00:00  0.000  0.100 0.054 0.111 0.111 - 0
10 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.100 0.055 0.127 0.127 - 0
11 unknown  0:00:00  0.000  0.098 0.058 0.366 0.367 - 0
12 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.223 0.069 0.368 0.671 178 54
13 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.143 0.070 0.145 0.331 289 54
14 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.208 0.070 0.360 0.590 95 22
15 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.093 0.071 0.143 0.143 - 0
16 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.147 0.074 0.159 0.201 348 15
17 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.163 0.074 0.154 0.154 - 0
18 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.180 0.075 0.140 0.242 343 35
19 FreeBSD  0:00:00  0.000  0.124 0.077 0.146 0.187 409 17
20 Windows Server 2003  0:00:00  0.000  0.142 0.080 0.228 0.551 219 71
21 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.196 0.083 0.163 0.205 267 11
22 FreeBSD  0:00:00  0.000  0.226 0.085 0.179 0.596 71 29
23 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.244 0.092 0.567 1.673 55 61
24 F5 BIG-IP  0:00:00  0.000  0.125 0.099 0.283 0.587 156 48
25 Windows Server 2012  0:00:00  0.000  0.081 0.123 0.254 0.629 145 55
26 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.200 0.128 0.257 0.539 84 24
27 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.215 0.136 0.270 0.270 - 0
28 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.228 0.138 0.268 0.521 149 38
29 Windows Server 2012  0:00:00  0.391  0.068 0.052 0.122 0.227 219 23
30 unknown  0:00:00  0.391  0.192 0.120 0.534 0.898 189 69
31 Linux  0:00:00  0.519  0.213 0.057 0.113 0.113 - -
32 Linux  0:00:00  0.519  0.128 0.077 0.154 0.154 - 0
33 Linux  0:00:00  0.519  0.185 0.123 0.555 0.882 198 65
34 Linux  0:00:00  0.520  0.115 0.061 0.129 0.206 447 34
35 Linux  0:00:00  0.520  0.237 0.101 0.338 1.074 298 220
36 Linux  0:00:00  0.520  0.220 0.303 0.371 0.371 - -
37 unknown  0:00:00  0.650  0.178 0.075 0.215 0.215 - 0
38 Linux  0:00:00  1.290  0.135 0.060 0.144 0.146 - -
39 Linux  0:00:00  1.292  0.172 0.125 0.250 0.379 126 16
40 unknown  0:00:00  1.548  0.131 0.102 0.201 0.201 - -
41 Windows Server 2003  0:00:00  1.928  0.110 0.068 0.140 0.841 105 74
42 Linux  0:00:00  2.054  0.098 0.084 0.161 1.148 31 30
43 unknown  0:00:00  2.558  0.100 0.023 1.359 1.489 653 85
44 unknown  0:00:00  2.558  0.131 0.024 0.605 0.653 888 43
Report from 22-Aug-2014 07:25 till 23-Aug-2014 07:22
Generated on 23-Aug-2014 07:30

Note: Outage times display the minimum outage time which may understate each outage by up to 15 minutes, which is the sampling frequency.

If you are researching prospective hosting locations, or performing competitor analysis and would like to buy bespoke performance monitoring of sites of your choice, or access to historical data, please mail us at sales@netcraft.com

Interpreting the Tables

Using the performance of a hosting provider's own site to determine the performance of the hosting companies network, is only indicative. By default the sites are ranked in order of failed requests and time to connect, shortest first, in order to give the clearest indication of network capacity and congestion, with the least impact from the performance of the companies' own web servers, though it is possible to sort by any column by clicking on the column heading.

Presently our performance collectors are located at London/DXI Networks, New York/New York Internet, Pennsylvania/INetU-2, San Jose/Datapipe, Italy/Aruba, Romania/Hostway, Zurich/Qube and Amsterdam/Webair. These companies have an advantage over the other companies listed in the table, as each of them have a collector in their own datacenter. Companies in the Far East are at a disadvantage as we do not currently have a performance collector in the region.

Companies using a caching system such as Akamai would have a particular advantage as the response to our request would come from the Akamai server closest to each performance collector.

If you are using the table as a guide when choosing where to locate a dedicated or collocated server, remember that connection times fluctuate continually, and only hundredths of a second separate the top companies. Avoiding companies showing prolonged outages is likely to be a better strategy than necessarily going for the company with the fastest connection time.

Other factors including availability and quality of support, and price will also be important. If you are considering shared hosting then the load on the shared hosting system will likely be a greater constraint on the performance of your site than network connection time.

More information can be found in the FAQ.