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  0.173 0.011 0.266 0.312 1382 63
2 FreeBSD  0:00:00  0.000  0.095 0.015 0.031 0.046 581 9
3 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.075 0.021 0.043 0.043 - 0
4 Windows Server 2012  0:00:00  0.000  0.065 0.051 0.113 0.218 219 23
5 unknown  0:00:00  0.000  0.111 0.052 0.108 0.108 - 0
6 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.168 0.052 0.107 0.180 342 25
7 unknown  0:00:00  0.000  0.063 0.054 0.415 0.415 - 0
8 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.123 0.054 0.125 0.125 - 0
9 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.223 0.058 0.111 0.121 296 3
10 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.206 0.059 0.115 0.115 - -
11 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.140 0.067 0.169 0.174 - -
12 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.218 0.069 0.125 0.126 - 0
13 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.103 0.069 0.347 0.572 97 22
14 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.237 0.071 0.349 0.648 181 54
15 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.057 0.072 0.144 0.144 - 0
16 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.121 0.073 0.155 0.387 233 54
17 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.185 0.075 0.152 0.152 - 0
18 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.160 0.075 0.161 0.205 331 15
19 FreeBSD  0:00:00  0.000  0.120 0.078 0.154 0.215 271 17
20 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.178 0.080 0.163 0.206 258 11
21 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.141 0.082 0.160 0.160 - 0
22 FreeBSD  0:00:00  0.000  0.230 0.082 0.169 0.589 70 29
23 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.161 0.083 0.148 0.260 311 35
24 Windows Server 2003  0:00:00  0.000  0.133 0.088 0.238 0.608 191 71
25 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.243 0.095 0.581 1.817 49 61
26 F5 BIG-IP  0:00:00  0.000  0.108 0.097 0.303 0.707 118 48
27 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.258 0.101 0.340 1.074 300 220
28 unknown  0:00:00  0.000  0.136 0.107 0.210 0.210 - -
29 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.188 0.109 0.185 0.186 - -
30 unknown  0:00:00  0.000  0.182 0.121 0.669 1.101 181 78
31 Windows Server 2012  0:00:00  0.000  0.067 0.122 0.249 0.621 147 55
32 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.171 0.123 0.569 0.901 198 66
33 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.190 0.129 0.256 0.384 126 16
34 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.231 0.133 0.261 0.515 149 38
35 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.180 0.138 0.272 0.576 78 24
36 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.193 0.149 0.290 0.290 - 0
37 unknown  0:00:00  0.521  0.265 0.077 0.218 0.218 - 0
38 Linux  0:00:00  0.522  0.104 0.052 0.127 0.204 446 34
39 unknown  0:00:00  0.650  0.240 0.016 0.035 0.125 583 53
40 unknown  0:00:00  1.548  0.137 0.022 0.184 0.185 1879 1
41 Windows Server 2003  0:00:00  1.550  0.166 0.129 0.218 1.014 93 74
42 unknown  0:00:00  1.933  0.166 0.045 1.406 1.540 635 85
43 unknown  0:00:00  3.069  0.146 0.040 0.664 0.718 808 43
44 Linux  0:00:00  22.174  0.114 0.068 0.148 4.643 7 30
Report from 26-Aug-2014 16:52 till 27-Aug-2014 16:51
Generated on 27-Aug-2014 16:57

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.