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. 40 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  0.265 0.007 0.017 0.018 - -
2 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.316 0.009 0.179 0.179 - 0
3 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.303 0.009 0.158 0.158 - 0
4 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.305 0.009 0.153 0.153 - 0
5 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.233 0.009 0.551 0.573 1972 44
6 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.378 0.010 0.201 0.373 260 45
7 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.163 0.013 0.026 0.033 1186 9
8 FreeBSD  0:00:00  0.000  0.616 0.020 0.046 0.122 754 58
9 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.334 0.025 0.051 0.051 - 0
10 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.149 0.046 0.095 0.095 - 0
11 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.201 0.051 0.104 0.106 11242 16
12 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.214 0.054 0.245 0.277 273 9
13 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.132 0.063 0.127 0.127 - -
14 FreeBSD  0:00:00  0.000  0.158 0.063 0.122 0.167 371 17
15 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.159 0.064 0.133 0.133 - 0
16 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.145 0.064 0.129 0.129 - 0
17 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.117 0.067 0.137 0.138 2738 3
18 FreeBSD  0:00:00  0.000  0.242 0.069 0.139 0.139 - 0
19 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.242 0.069 0.138 0.138 - 0
20 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.164 0.069 0.181 0.277 409 39
21 unknown  0:00:00  0.000  0.108 0.072 0.145 0.145 - 0
22 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.137 0.073 0.196 0.196 - 0
23 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.114 0.073 1.003 1.764 86 66
24 F5 BIG-IP  0:00:00  0.000  0.200 0.074 0.150 0.388 245 59
25 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.328 0.083 0.390 0.703 169 53
26 Windows Server 2012  0:00:00  0.000  0.091 0.087 0.175 0.175 - 0
27 Citrix Netscaler  0:00:00  0.000  0.180 0.087 0.180 0.359 275 49
28 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.201 0.087 0.176 0.177 - 0
29 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.236 0.088 0.179 0.179 - 0
30 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.218 0.091 0.170 0.170 - -
31 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.197 0.095 0.190 0.327 191 26
32 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.197 0.109 0.256 0.529 92 25
33 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.523 0.197 0.414 0.414 - 0
34 Linux  0:00:00  0.566  0.119 0.009 0.171 0.172 15244 1
35 unknown  0:00:00  0.708  0.173 0.084 0.169 0.169 - -
36 Linux  0:00:00  0.845  0.165 0.081 0.345 0.613 388 104
37 Linux  0:00:00  0.990  0.274 0.010 1.501 1.609 886 95
38 Linux  0:00:00  1.408  0.169 0.006 0.157 0.356 164 33
39 Linux  0:00:00  2.232  0.184 0.008 1.750 2.460 198 141
40 Windows Server 2012  0:00:00  2.500  0.183 0.086 0.201 0.201 - -
 

Report from 1-Sep-2015 23:46 till 2-Sep-2015 23:45

Generated on 2-Sep-2015 23:50

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, San Jose/Datapipe, Phoenix/GoDaddy, Zurich/Qube, Amsterdam/Webair, New York/New York Internet-2, Italy/Aruba-2 and Pennsylvania/INetU-3. 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.