GitHub|Since 2007

GB123 RegvsLittlefishGB

Head-to-head hosting performance comparison based on real test data

Test Date: 2/24/2026

WPTR Score1669 ms
Rank#502
TTFB1117ms
Time to 1MB290ms
Score1669
LCP1517ms
FCP1317ms
WPTR ScoreWinner885 ms
Rank#507
TTFB1231ms
Time to 1MB252ms
Score885
LCP1631ms
FCP1431ms

Our Verdict

123 Reg wins with 1117ms TTFB (vs Littlefish's 1231ms)

TTFB Breakdown (Connection Phases)

Phase123 RegLittlefishWinner
DNS Lookup40ms39msLittlefish
TCP Connection54ms51msLittlefish
TLS Handshake133ms100msLittlefish
Server Processing746ms90msLittlefish
Total TTFB973ms280ms123 Reg

Technology & Security Features

123 Reg

Server/CDNenvoy
HSTS Disabled
Brotli Compression Disabled
HTTP/3 (QUIC) Disabled
Page Size901.5 KB

Littlefish

Server/CDNUnknown
HSTS Disabled
Brotli Compression Disabled
HTTP/3 (QUIC) Disabled
Page Size122.9 KB
0/3
123 Reg Security Features
0/3
Littlefish Security Features

TTFB Comparison Over Time

Understanding the Metrics

WPTR Score: Wptr Lab Real-Load Score: (Time to 1MB x 2.4) + TTFB. Raw server & network performance (Lower is better).
TTFB: Time to First Byte - How fast the server responds
Time to 1MB: Time to 1MB - Time taken to download 1MB of data (lower is better)
LCP: Largest Contentful Paint - When main content loads
FCP: First Contentful Paint - When first content appears
Score: Overall performance score (0-100)

A Note on Hosting Selection

While TTFB and performance metrics are important indicators, choosing the right hosting provider involves many other factors: security measures, customer support quality, uptime guarantees, scalability options, and pricing structure. Academic research emphasizes that a balanced approach considering all these aspects leads to better long-term outcomes.

Chizhov, A., & Fesenko, A. (2025). Web hosting companies' client solutions: A study of a strategic standpoint. Corporate & Business Strategy Review. doi.org/10.22495/cbsrv6i1art14

Data in this comparison is obtained through independent tests using our TTFB Checker tool.