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.qubenet.net Qube Managed Services Linux  0:00:00  0.003  0.196 0.096 0.194 0.194 - 0 2 www.kattare.com Kattare Internet Services Linux  0:00:00  0.007  0.186 0.064 0.129 0.263 100 23 3 www.nyi.net New York Internet FreeBSD  0:00:00  0.007  0.172 0.079 0.160 0.486 125 34 4 www.xilo.net XILO Communications Ltd. Linux  0:00:00  0.007  0.275 0.103 0.319 0.537 112 20 5 www.datapipe.net Datapipe FreeBSD  0:00:00  0.014  0.100 0.016 0.032 0.048 470 9 6 www.logicworks.net Logicworks Linux  0:00:00  0.014  0.199 0.082 0.473 0.585 228 30 7 www.choopa.com www.choopa.com unknown  0:00:00  0.014  0.207 0.088 0.180 0.245 242 11 8 www.netcetera.co.uk Netcetera Windows Server 2012  0:00:00  0.014  0.083 0.102 0.206 0.512 93 21 9 www.reliableservers.com ReliableServers.com Linux  0:00:00  0.014  0.285 0.103 0.199 0.275 236 11 10 www.swishmail.com Swishmail FreeBSD  0:00:00  0.017  0.175 0.083 0.166 0.296 146 17 11 www.memset.com Memset Linux  0:00:00  0.017  0.149 0.110 0.223 0.611 199 30 12 www.serverintellect.com Server Intellect Windows Server 2008  0:00:00  0.021  0.104 0.098 0.199 0.495 106 28 13 www.multacom.com Multacom FreeBSD  0:00:00  0.031  0.172 0.092 0.185 0.470 52 16 14 www.codero.com Codero Linux  0:00:00  0.038  0.214 0.097 0.412 0.826 180 60 15 krystal.co.uk krystal.co.uk Linux  0:00:00  0.063  0.108 0.071 0.167 0.232 165 16 16 www.aruba.it www.aruba.it Windows Server 2003  0:00:00  0.066  0.151 0.113 0.228 0.986 67 50 17 www.vi.net Virtual Internet Linux  0:00:00  0.080  0.199 0.103 0.225 0.508 154 22 18 www.inetu.net INetU Windows Server 2008  0:00:00  0.087  0.179 0.095 0.282 0.565 122 25 19 www.leaseweb.com LeaseWeb Linux  0:00:00  0.091  0.346 0.126 0.515 0.516 - 0 20 www.iWeb8.com iWeb Linux  0:00:00  0.105  0.120 0.088 0.176 0.176 - 0 21 www.iomarthosting.com Iomart Linux  0:00:00  0.108  0.140 0.138 0.291 0.460 149 25 22 www.pair.com Pair Networks FreeBSD  0:00:00  0.139  0.262 0.093 0.188 0.581 80 26 23 www.rackspace.com Rackspace Linux  0:00:00  0.150  0.251 0.086 0.171 0.171 - 0 24 www.cwcs.co.uk www.cwcs.co.uk Linux  0:00:00  0.153  0.195 0.081 0.165 0.734 68 41 25 www.singlehop.com www.singlehop.com Linux  0:00:00  0.153  0.291 0.091 0.266 0.651 211 73 26 www.webair.com Webair Internet Development FreeBSD  0:29:11  0.153  0.366 0.084 0.184 0.375 183 34 27 www.colocationamerica.com Colocation America Linux  0:00:00  0.164  0.184 0.109 0.760 1.102 116 42 28 www.uk2.net www.uk2.net Linux  0:00:00  0.167  0.202 0.104 0.213 0.405 235 25 29 www.dinahosting.com www.dinahosting.com Linux  0:00:00  0.171  0.086 0.094 0.190 0.190 - 0 30 one.com One.com Linux  0:01:16  0.174  0.242 0.084 0.169 0.169 - 0 31 www.godaddy.com GoDaddy.com Inc Windows Server 2008  0:09:08  0.446  0.362 0.111 0.397 0.940 185 82 32 www.serverbeach.com www.serverbeach.com Linux  0:17:47  0.502  0.133 0.016 0.552 0.589 443 43 33 www.peer1.com www.peer1.com Linux  0:00:00  2.532  0.103 0.021 0.243 0.341 497 77 Report from 31-Aug-2012 23:03 till 30-Sep-2012 23:59 Generated on 19-Jun-2013 00:34

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 reseaching 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.