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  0.149 0.010 0.266 0.311 1396 63
2 unknown  0:00:00  0.000  0.266 0.020 0.038 0.130 569 53
3 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.082 0.020 0.041 0.041 - 0
4 unknown  0:00:00  0.000  0.102 0.020 0.136 0.136 16616 1
5 FreeBSD  0:00:00  0.000  0.118 0.026 0.042 0.057 577 9
6 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.212 0.051 0.101 0.102 2497 3
7 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.256 0.051 0.104 0.104 - 0
8 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.170 0.052 0.108 0.128 371 7
9 unknown  0:00:00  0.000  0.097 0.054 0.108 0.108 - 0
10 unknown  0:00:00  0.000  0.085 0.058 0.363 0.363 - 0
11 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.102 0.059 0.131 0.131 - 0
12 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.143 0.069 0.146 0.332 289 54
13 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.178 0.070 0.358 0.588 95 22
14 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.097 0.072 0.143 0.143 - 0
15 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.231 0.072 0.372 0.673 179 54
16 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.156 0.074 0.150 0.150 - 0
17 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.146 0.074 0.159 0.203 338 15
18 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.173 0.075 0.140 0.247 324 35
19 FreeBSD  0:00:00  0.000  0.123 0.077 0.146 0.187 410 17
20 Windows Server 2003  0:00:00  0.000  0.140 0.080 0.228 0.552 219 71
21 FreeBSD  0:00:00  0.000  0.227 0.081 0.176 0.590 71 29
22 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.187 0.085 0.164 0.207 265 11
23 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.234 0.092 0.566 1.672 55 61
24 Windows Server 2012  0:00:00  0.000  0.078 0.123 0.252 0.628 145 55
25 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.196 0.128 0.257 0.539 84 24
26 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.217 0.136 0.269 0.269 - 0
27 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.229 0.138 0.268 0.520 150 38
28 Windows Server 2012  0:00:00  0.522  0.072 0.056 0.121 0.227 217 23
29 Linux  0:00:00  0.522  0.203 0.057 0.113 0.113 - -
30 Linux  0:00:00  0.522  0.117 0.061 0.131 0.210 438 34
31 Linux  0:00:00  0.522  0.130 0.077 0.154 0.154 - 0
32 Linux  0:00:00  0.522  0.234 0.101 0.337 1.072 299 220
33 unknown  0:00:00  0.522  0.193 0.116 0.551 0.915 189 69
34 Linux  0:00:00  0.522  0.184 0.123 0.556 0.883 198 65
35 Linux  0:00:00  0.522  0.217 0.331 0.399 0.399 - -
36 Windows Server 2003  0:00:00  0.651  0.106 0.068 0.139 0.839 105 74
37 unknown  0:00:00  0.651  0.174 0.075 0.214 0.214 - 0
38 F5 BIG-IP  0:00:00  0.780  0.120 0.099 0.283 0.588 156 48
39 Linux  0:00:00  1.295  0.137 0.060 0.143 0.146 - -
40 Linux  0:00:00  1.295  0.176 0.125 0.250 0.380 125 16
41 unknown  0:00:00  1.552  0.129 0.102 0.201 0.201 - -
42 unknown  0:00:00  1.933  0.141 0.026 0.605 0.654 876 43
43 Linux  0:00:00  2.062  0.098 0.084 0.162 1.155 31 30
44 unknown  0:00:00  2.564  0.097 0.023 1.353 1.484 652 85
Report from 22-Aug-2014 11:25 till 23-Aug-2014 11:21
Generated on 23-Aug-2014 11:28

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.