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 average total http time 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  0.083 0.021 0.043 0.043 - 0
2 FreeBSD  0:00:00  0.000  0.090 0.016 0.031 0.046 591 9
3 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.173 0.050 0.100 0.102 2555 3
4 unknown  0:00:00  0.000  0.067 0.052 0.104 0.104 - 0
5 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.266 0.051 0.104 0.104 - 0
6 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.183 0.055 0.111 0.111 - -
7 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.084 0.054 0.127 0.127 - 0
8 unknown  0:00:00  0.000  0.067 0.023 0.138 0.139 1909 1
9 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.112 0.060 0.144 0.144 - -
10 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.057 0.073 0.145 0.145 - 0
11 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.184 0.076 0.152 0.152 - 0
12 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.119 0.077 0.154 0.154 - 0
13 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.173 0.097 0.169 0.169 - -
14 FreeBSD  0:00:00  0.000  0.108 0.069 0.139 0.180 404 17
15 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.173 0.056 0.111 0.184 343 25
16 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.146 0.074 0.153 0.198 249 11
17 unknown  0:00:00  0.000  0.151 0.099 0.199 0.199 - -
18 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.096 0.052 0.124 0.202 446 34
19 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.130 0.073 0.158 0.204 325 15
20 unknown  0:00:00  3.065  0.244 0.068 0.204 0.204 - 0
21 unknown  0:00:00  0.000  0.153 0.043 0.089 0.231 369 52
22 Windows Server 2012  0:00:00  0.000  0.054 0.055 0.130 0.235 221 23
23 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.173 0.063 0.164 0.285 290 35
24 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.115 0.070 0.146 0.332 289 54
25 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.121 0.011 0.280 0.340 1065 64
26 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.185 0.181 0.353 0.353 - 0
27 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.171 0.126 0.252 0.378 129 16
28 unknown  0:00:00  0.000  0.073 0.054 0.381 0.381 - 0
29 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.231 0.120 0.246 0.493 152 38
30 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.176 0.128 0.257 0.536 85 24
31 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.331 0.069 0.323 0.547 97 22
32 Windows Server 2003  0:00:00  0.000  0.136 0.086 0.235 0.562 217 71
33 FreeBSD  0:00:00  0.651  0.218 0.080 0.164 0.574 72 29
34 unknown  0:00:00  0.000  0.104 0.020 0.577 0.624 911 43
35 Windows Server 2012  0:00:00  0.000  0.054 0.126 0.254 0.628 146 55
36 F5 BIG-IP  0:00:00  0.000  0.100 0.092 0.320 0.636 149 47
37 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.265 0.073 0.379 0.675 182 54
38 Windows Server 2003  0:00:00  0.000  0.104 0.068 0.139 0.833 106 74
39 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.172 0.123 0.569 0.898 200 66
40 unknown  0:00:00  0.000  0.190 0.126 0.668 1.049 191 73
41 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.237 0.100 0.333 1.060 302 220
42 unknown  0:00:00  0.651  0.110 0.021 1.317 1.444 671 85
43 Linux  0:00:00  0.000  0.229 0.091 0.541 1.652 53 58
44 Linux  1:59:37  77.863  0.100 0.070 0.145 9.671 3 30
Report from 30-Aug-2014 08:10 till 31-Aug-2014 08:07
Generated on 31-Aug-2014 08:15

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.