Hosting Providers sites ordered by failures 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 www.nyi.net New York Internet FreeBSD  0:00:00  0.000  0.161 0.082 0.166 0.494 137 34
2 www.logicworks.net Logicworks Linux  0:00:00  0.003  0.143 0.082 0.548 0.689 189 28
3 www.netcetera.co.uk Netcetera Windows Server 2012  0:00:00  0.003  0.109 0.120 0.242 0.604 91 21
4 www.swishmail.com Swishmail FreeBSD  0:00:00  0.007  0.133 0.073 0.147 0.368 84 17
5 www.iWeb8.com iWeb Linux  0:00:00  0.007  0.145 0.082 0.163 0.163 - 0
6 www.datapipe.net Datapipe FreeBSD  0:00:00  0.010  0.151 0.025 0.051 0.077 367 9
7 www.choopa.com www.choopa.com Linux  0:00:00  0.010  0.192 0.093 0.191 0.272 257 11
8 www.memset.com Memset Linux  0:00:00  0.010  0.170 0.124 0.248 0.504 182 31
9 www.reliableservers.com ReliableServers.com Linux  0:00:00  0.013  0.215 0.088 0.180 0.256 241 11
10 www.cwcs.co.uk CWCS Linux  0:00:00  0.017  0.343 0.137 0.278 1.006 69 39
11 www.multacom.com Multacom Linux  0:00:00  0.024  0.112 0.059 0.118 0.300 52 16
12 krystal.co.uk krystal.co.uk Linux  0:00:00  0.024  0.204 0.109 0.240 0.418 168 16
13 www.leaseweb.com LeaseWeb unknown  0:00:00  0.027  0.370 0.118 0.550 0.550 - 0
14 www.pair.com Pair Networks FreeBSD  0:00:00  0.030  0.239 0.080 0.164 0.506 80 26
15 www.serverintellect.com Server Intellect Windows Server 2012  0:00:00  0.030  0.159 0.100 0.202 0.503 103 27
16 www.qubenet.net Qube Managed Services Linux  0:00:00  0.030  0.193 0.102 0.206 0.207 7687 5
17 www.rackspace.com Rackspace F5 BIG-IP  0:00:00  0.034  0.196 0.080 0.160 0.160 - 0
18 www.dinahosting.com www.dinahosting.com Linux  0:00:00  0.034  1.235 0.134 0.270 0.271 - 0
19 www.inetu.net INetU Windows Server 2003  0:00:00  0.040  0.109 0.089 0.264 0.534 133 29
20 www.godaddy.com GoDaddy.com Inc Linux  0:00:00  0.044  0.329 0.098 0.467 0.907 175 106
21 www.codero.com Codero Linux  0:00:00  0.050  0.235 0.081 0.386 0.737 180 62
22 www.aruba.it www.aruba.it Windows Server 2003  0:00:00  0.054  0.253 0.147 0.295 1.315 71 50
23 www.hosting4less.com Hosting 4 Less Linux  0:00:00  0.057  0.113 0.077 0.157 0.308 183 26
24 www.kattare.com Kattare Internet Services Linux  0:00:00  0.084  0.153 0.075 0.152 0.308 101 23
25 www.singlehop.com SingleHop Linux  0:00:00  0.131  0.212 0.087 0.373 0.668 182 50
26 www.xilo.net XILO Communications Ltd. Linux  0:00:00  0.151  0.374 0.111 0.341 0.577 107 20
27 www.iomarthosting.com Iomart Linux  0:05:38  0.161  0.168 0.123 0.256 0.480 152 25
28 www.webair.com Webair Internet Development FreeBSD  0:49:53  0.282  0.234 0.051 0.118 0.258 165 33
29 www.serverbeach.com www.serverbeach.com Linux  0:13:28  0.299  0.158 0.013 0.642 0.761 388 48
30 www.colocationamerica.com Colocation America Linux  0:12:18  0.457  0.188 0.082 0.712 0.972 92 42
31 www.hosteurope.de Host Europe Linux  0:00:00  0.664  0.166 0.091 0.424 0.775 174 61
32 one.com One.com unknown  0:19:23  3.766  0.260 0.076 0.152 0.152 - 0
33 www.peer1.com www.peer1.com Linux  0:13:27  3.770  0.163 0.011 6.571 6.837 453 89
Report from 30-Jun-2012 23:00 till 31-Jul-2012 23:59
Generated on 25-Apr-2014 02:09

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.