Hosting Providers sites ordered by failures 42 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 www.datapipe.net Datapipe FreeBSD  0:00:00  0.003  0.047 0.014 0.029 0.049 461 9
2 www.inetu.net INetU Windows Server 2003  0:00:00  0.007  0.090 0.081 0.243 0.481 123 26
3 www.choopa.com www.choopa.com Linux  0:00:00  0.010  0.153 0.041 0.088 0.097 313 12
4 www.kattare.com Kattare Internet Services Linux  0:00:00  0.010  0.193 0.148 0.298 0.597 71 13
5 www.swishmail.com Swishmail FreeBSD  0:00:00  0.014  0.136 0.071 0.143 0.344 98 17
6 www.multacom.com Multacom Linux  0:00:00  0.014  0.219 0.130 0.262 0.767 58 16
7 www.qubenet.net Qube Managed Services Linux  0:00:00  0.017  0.091 0.034 0.070 0.070 - 0
8 www.reliableservers.com ReliableServers.com Linux  0:00:00  0.017  0.192 0.081 0.167 0.175 279 11
9 www.pair.com Pair Networks FreeBSD  0:00:00  0.017  0.334 0.091 0.185 0.644 79 26
10 www.codero.com Codero Citrix Netscaler  0:00:00  0.021  0.157 0.061 0.355 0.626 163 51
11 www.rackspace.com Rackspace F5 BIG-IP  0:00:00  0.021  0.196 0.076 0.161 0.399 213 51
12 www.serverintellect.com Server Intellect Windows Server 2012  0:00:00  0.021  0.034 0.117 0.238 0.672 103 27
13 www.netcetera.co.uk Netcetera Windows Server 2012  0:00:00  0.028  0.045 0.049 0.100 0.202 118 20
14 www.nyi.net New York Internet unknown  0:00:00  0.028  0.125 0.080 0.159 0.444 150 34
15 www.cwcs.co.uk CWCS Linux  0:00:00  0.031  0.198 0.090 0.186 0.726 81 38
16 www.xilo.net XILO Communications Ltd. Linux  0:00:00  0.042  0.112 0.049 0.223 0.347 105 18
17 www.memset.com Memset Linux  0:00:00  0.045  0.093 0.052 0.108 0.205 200 30
18 www.hosting4less.com Hosting 4 Less Linux  0:00:00  0.045  0.248 0.134 0.271 0.344 179 26
19 krystal.co.uk krystal.co.uk Linux  0:00:00  0.049  0.215 0.110 0.242 0.440 167 16
20 www.peer1.com www.peer1.com unknown  0:00:00  0.080  0.150 0.022 0.639 0.790 478 71
21 www.iomarthosting.com Iomart Linux  0:00:00  0.087  0.093 0.060 0.131 0.236 144 24
22 www.serverbeach.com www.serverbeach.com unknown  0:00:00  0.115  0.063 0.022 0.049 0.147 741 41
23 www.godaddy.com GoDaddy.com Inc Linux  0:00:00  0.128  0.409 0.143 0.465 1.116 214 99
24 www.dinahosting.com www.dinahosting.com Linux  0:18:54  0.142  0.495 0.082 0.167 0.167 - 0
25 www.colocationamerica.com Colocation America Linux  0:00:00  0.146  0.156 0.108 0.704 1.296 108 38
26 www.webair.com Webair Internet Development Linux  0:20:52  0.250  0.283 0.074 0.163 0.379 198 32
27 www.aruba.it Aruba Windows Server 2003  1:01:47  0.312  0.146 0.081 0.160 0.685 71 50
28 www.singlehop.com SingleHop Linux  0:17:58  0.590  0.323 0.098 0.381 0.792 192 55
29 www.logicworks.net Logicworks Linux  5:02:42  1.638  0.196 0.074 0.164 0.462 180 42
30 one.com One.com unknown  0:00:00  4.051  2.414 0.123 0.247 0.247 - 0
Report from 1-Apr-2012 00:00 till 30-Apr-2012 23:59
Generated on 23-Jul-2014 20:09

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, Virginia/Rackspace, San Jose/Datapipe, Italy/Aruba, Pennsylvania/INetU-2, Phoenix/GoDaddy, Vancouver/Peer1, Romania/Hostway and Zurich/Qube. 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.