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  0.133 0.009 0.269 0.314 1399 63
2 unknown  0:00:00  0.000  0.288 0.016 0.033 0.125 572 53
3 unknown  0:00:00  0.000  0.094 0.020 0.136 0.137 1907 1
4 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.086 0.020 0.044 0.044 - 0
5 FreeBSD  0:00:00  0.000  0.119 0.026 0.041 0.056 580 9
6 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.223 0.051 0.101 0.103 2488 3
7 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.270 0.051 0.104 0.104 - 0
8 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.168 0.052 0.107 0.149 352 15
9 unknown  0:00:00  0.000  0.089 0.054 0.363 0.363 - 0
10 unknown  0:00:00  0.000  0.099 0.054 0.111 0.111 - 0
11 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.093 0.055 0.127 0.128 - 0
12 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.227 0.069 0.370 0.668 181 54
13 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.138 0.070 0.145 0.330 291 54
14 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.265 0.070 0.359 0.588 95 22
15 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.085 0.070 0.141 0.141 - 0
16 FreeBSD  0:00:00  0.000  0.117 0.073 0.142 0.183 407 17
17 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.143 0.074 0.159 0.201 356 15
18 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.161 0.074 0.154 0.154 - 0
19 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.192 0.074 0.138 0.237 354 35
20 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.186 0.083 0.162 0.204 265 11
21 Windows Server 2003  0:00:00  0.000  0.147 0.083 0.231 0.555 218 71
22 F5 BIG-IP  0:00:00  0.000  0.139 0.084 0.268 0.577 154 48
23 FreeBSD  0:00:00  0.000  0.225 0.085 0.180 0.598 70 29
24 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.244 0.085 0.563 1.666 55 61
25 Windows Server 2012  0:00:00  0.000  0.079 0.123 0.254 0.628 146 55
26 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.199 0.128 0.257 0.537 85 24
27 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.229 0.136 0.264 0.517 149 38
28 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.205 0.136 0.269 0.269 - 0
29 Windows Server 2012  0:00:00  0.392  0.080 0.052 0.127 0.232 220 23
30 Linux  0:00:00  0.521  0.239 0.057 0.113 0.113 - -
31 Linux  0:00:00  0.521  0.133 0.077 0.155 0.155 - 0
32 Linux  0:00:00  0.521  0.253 0.101 0.339 1.082 296 220
33 Linux  0:00:00  0.521  0.183 0.123 0.550 0.879 197 65
34 Linux  0:00:00  0.521  0.217 0.221 0.290 0.290 - -
35 Linux  0:00:00  0.522  0.118 0.062 0.131 0.208 445 34
36 unknown  0:00:00  1.039  0.134 0.102 0.200 0.200 - -
37 Citrix Netscaler  0:00:00  1.039  0.199 0.124 0.491 0.859 187 69
38 unknown  0:00:00  1.292  0.177 0.075 0.211 0.211 - 0
39 Linux  0:00:00  1.292  0.172 0.125 0.249 0.376 128 16
40 Linux  0:00:00  1.294  0.137 0.060 0.144 0.147 - -
41 Linux  0:00:00  1.550  0.101 0.088 0.166 1.170 30 30
42 unknown  0:00:00  1.556  0.127 0.036 0.619 0.668 892 43
43 Windows Server 2003  0:00:00  2.558  0.113 0.068 0.151 0.845 106 74
44 unknown  0:00:00  3.193  0.111 0.022 1.350 1.481 654 85
Report from 22-Aug-2014 01:16 till 23-Aug-2014 01:14
Generated on 23-Aug-2014 01:21

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.