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  0.151 0.012 0.274 0.322 1330 63
2 FreeBSD  0:00:00  0.000  0.089 0.015 0.030 0.045 580 9
3 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.077 0.021 0.043 0.043 - 0
4 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.224 0.051 0.102 0.105 881 3
5 unknown  0:00:00  0.000  0.125 0.052 0.108 0.108 - 0
6 Windows Server 2012  0:00:00  0.000  0.061 0.052 0.113 0.220 217 23
7 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.227 0.052 0.107 0.107 - 0
8 unknown  0:00:00  0.000  0.062 0.054 0.434 0.434 - 0
9 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.123 0.055 0.125 0.125 - 0
10 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.205 0.060 0.115 0.115 - -
11 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.104 0.069 0.344 0.570 97 22
12 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.155 0.069 0.173 0.180 - -
13 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.121 0.070 0.146 0.333 288 54
14 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.242 0.070 0.346 0.648 179 54
15 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.060 0.072 0.145 0.145 - 0
16 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.155 0.073 0.158 0.205 317 15
17 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.205 0.075 0.153 0.153 - 0
18 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.171 0.076 0.159 0.205 240 11
19 FreeBSD  0:00:00  0.000  0.121 0.077 0.154 0.211 294 17
20 FreeBSD  0:00:00  0.000  0.226 0.081 0.176 0.594 70 29
21 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.143 0.082 0.160 0.160 - 0
22 Windows Server 2003  0:00:00  0.000  0.131 0.084 0.232 0.566 212 71
23 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.239 0.086 0.569 1.732 52 60
24 F5 BIG-IP  0:00:00  0.000  0.110 0.092 0.291 0.645 134 48
25 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.270 0.101 0.360 1.105 295 220
26 unknown  0:00:00  0.000  0.136 0.110 0.213 0.213 - -
27 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.182 0.121 0.198 0.199 - -
28 Windows Server 2012  0:00:00  0.000  0.069 0.122 0.249 0.621 147 55
29 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.167 0.123 0.573 0.906 198 66
30 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.185 0.126 0.252 0.379 128 16
31 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.180 0.128 0.257 0.541 84 24
32 unknown  0:00:00  0.000  0.171 0.128 0.682 1.105 187 79
33 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.195 0.131 0.266 0.266 - 0
34 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.230 0.132 0.260 0.512 150 38
35 Linux  0:00:00  0.520  0.094 0.052 0.126 0.205 435 34
36 Linux  0:00:00  0.522  0.168 0.052 0.107 0.180 342 25
37 unknown  0:00:00  0.522  0.282 0.079 0.233 0.233 - 0
38 Linux  0:00:00  0.650  0.158 0.082 0.149 0.261 313 35
39 unknown  0:00:00  0.779  0.221 0.034 0.066 0.205 376 52
40 unknown  0:00:00  1.548  0.137 0.025 0.162 0.163 1883 1
41 Windows Server 2003  0:00:00  1.548  0.201 0.095 0.178 0.921 99 74
42 unknown  0:00:00  1.933  0.148 0.045 1.387 1.521 639 85
43 unknown  0:00:00  3.802  0.148 0.023 0.624 0.676 834 43
44 Linux  0:00:00  27.715  0.107 0.069 0.155 4.871 6 30
Report from 26-Aug-2014 22:55 till 27-Aug-2014 22:50
Generated on 27-Aug-2014 22:59

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.