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  0.137 0.010 0.271 0.316 1385 62
2 unknown  0:00:00  0.000  0.291 0.016 0.033 0.125 573 53
3 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.087 0.020 0.045 0.045 - 0
4 FreeBSD  0:00:00  0.000  0.122 0.026 0.041 0.056 581 9
5 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.269 0.051 0.104 0.104 - 0
6 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.218 0.051 0.102 0.103 2319 3
7 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.179 0.052 0.106 0.162 349 19
8 unknown  0:00:00  0.000  0.097 0.054 0.366 0.366 - 0
9 unknown  0:00:00  0.000  0.096 0.055 0.111 0.112 - 0
10 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.091 0.055 0.127 0.127 - 0
11 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.230 0.069 0.352 0.652 180 54
12 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.307 0.069 0.351 0.581 95 22
13 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.132 0.069 0.148 0.331 293 54
14 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.078 0.070 0.141 0.141 - 0
15 FreeBSD  0:00:00  0.000  0.110 0.073 0.143 0.184 408 17
16 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.141 0.073 0.159 0.200 355 15
17 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.160 0.074 0.153 0.153 - 0
18 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.175 0.082 0.145 0.243 358 35
19 Windows Server 2003  0:00:00  0.000  0.150 0.084 0.228 0.561 213 71
20 F5 BIG-IP  0:00:00  0.000  0.143 0.084 0.260 0.574 151 48
21 FreeBSD  0:00:00  0.000  0.224 0.085 0.171 0.591 70 29
22 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.248 0.086 0.566 1.643 56 61
23 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.183 0.102 0.181 0.225 255 11
24 Windows Server 2012  0:00:00  0.000  0.071 0.123 0.254 0.629 145 55
25 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.204 0.128 0.257 0.540 84 24
26 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.234 0.137 0.267 0.522 148 38
27 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.185 0.138 0.273 0.273 - 0
28 Linux  0:00:00  0.261  0.131 0.077 0.155 0.155 - 0
29 unknown  0:00:00  0.391  0.074 0.020 0.135 0.136 1895 1
30 Windows Server 2012  0:00:00  0.391  0.080 0.051 0.123 0.229 219 23
31 Linux  0:00:00  0.391  0.195 0.123 0.550 0.877 198 65
32 Linux  0:00:00  0.520  0.257 0.057 0.113 0.113 - -
33 Linux  0:00:00  0.520  0.259 0.101 0.336 1.081 295 220
34 Linux  0:00:00  0.520  0.199 0.157 0.226 0.227 - -
35 Linux  0:00:00  0.521  0.113 0.061 0.130 0.207 445 34
36 Citrix Netscaler  0:00:00  0.779  0.187 0.125 0.463 0.886 163 69
37 Linux  0:00:00  1.038  0.136 0.062 0.146 0.149 - -
38 unknown  0:00:00  1.038  0.142 0.102 0.200 0.200 - -
39 unknown  0:00:00  1.039  0.134 0.032 0.614 0.662 901 43
40 unknown  0:00:00  1.292  0.204 0.071 0.206 0.206 - 0
41 Linux  0:00:00  1.294  0.177 0.124 0.249 0.375 129 16
42 Windows Server 2003  0:00:00  1.928  0.115 0.068 0.152 0.847 106 74
43 Linux  0:00:00  2.059  0.113 0.071 0.151 1.186 29 30
44 unknown  0:00:00  3.189  0.121 0.021 1.330 1.459 658 85
Report from 21-Aug-2014 19:35 till 22-Aug-2014 19:35
Generated on 22-Aug-2014 19:40

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.