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  0.124 0.012 0.297 0.350 1208 64
2 FreeBSD  0:00:00  0.000  0.084 0.018 0.033 0.048 578 9
3 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.063 0.022 0.045 0.045 - 0
4 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.234 0.050 0.101 0.104 893 3
5 Windows Server 2012  0:00:00  0.000  0.059 0.052 0.117 0.223 219 23
6 unknown  0:00:00  0.000  0.155 0.052 0.104 0.104 - 0
7 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.233 0.052 0.107 0.107 - 0
8 unknown  0:00:00  0.000  0.064 0.054 0.457 0.457 - 0
9 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.110 0.055 0.126 0.126 - 0
10 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.201 0.059 0.115 0.115 - -
11 unknown  0:00:00  0.000  0.177 0.063 0.125 0.337 247 52
12 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.251 0.069 0.343 0.637 183 54
13 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.137 0.070 0.146 0.331 291 54
14 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.067 0.071 0.144 0.144 - 0
15 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.106 0.073 0.334 0.556 98 22
16 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.146 0.073 0.158 0.204 323 15
17 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.163 0.073 0.173 0.182 - -
18 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.199 0.074 0.151 0.151 - 0
19 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.165 0.076 0.154 0.200 245 11
20 FreeBSD  0:00:00  0.000  0.219 0.080 0.176 0.588 71 29
21 FreeBSD  0:00:00  0.000  0.120 0.081 0.156 0.212 300 17
22 Windows Server 2003  0:00:00  0.000  0.135 0.084 0.231 0.579 204 71
23 F5 BIG-IP  0:00:00  0.000  0.109 0.084 0.272 0.587 150 47
24 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.240 0.085 0.562 1.697 52 60
25 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.265 0.101 0.422 1.183 289 220
26 unknown  0:00:00  0.000  0.134 0.110 0.209 0.209 - -
27 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.176 0.113 0.189 0.190 - -
28 Windows Server 2012  0:00:00  0.000  0.067 0.122 0.250 0.621 147 55
29 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.233 0.131 0.261 0.516 149 38
30 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.178 0.132 0.261 0.544 84 24
31 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.187 0.139 0.276 0.276 - 0
32 Linux  0:00:00  0.392  0.149 0.077 0.155 0.155 - 0
33 Linux  0:00:00  0.522  0.101 0.052 0.122 0.201 438 34
34 unknown  0:00:00  0.522  0.248 0.075 0.242 0.242 - 0
35 Linux  0:00:00  0.651  0.172 0.127 0.252 0.379 128 16
36 Linux  0:00:00  0.652  0.167 0.123 0.579 0.913 199 66
37 unknown  0:00:00  0.780  0.122 0.024 0.152 0.153 998 1
38 unknown  0:00:00  0.782  0.202 0.125 0.678 1.074 199 79
39 Linux  0:00:00  1.042  0.154 0.052 0.107 0.182 339 25
40 unknown  0:00:00  1.295  0.141 0.044 1.371 1.502 650 85
41 Windows Server 2003  0:00:00  1.297  0.188 0.071 0.145 0.878 101 74
42 Linux  0:00:00  1.299  0.134 0.060 0.122 0.216 374 35
43 unknown  0:00:00  3.057  0.141 0.023 0.615 0.665 861 43
44 Linux  0:00:00  30.334  0.099 0.069 0.154 5.539 6 30
Report from 27-Aug-2014 10:56 till 28-Aug-2014 10:54
Generated on 28-Aug-2014 11:05

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.