GitHub|Since 2007

ptAmen.ptvsEsotéricopt

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

Test Date: 2/25/2026

WPTR ScoreWinner1956 ms
Rank#598
TTFB668ms
Time to 1MB656ms
Score1956
LCP1068ms
FCP868ms
WPTR Score5462 ms
Rank#785
TTFB1729ms
Time to 1MB1175ms
Score5462
LCP2129ms
FCP1929ms

Our Verdict

Amen.pt wins with 668ms TTFB (vs Esotérico's 1729ms)

TTFB Breakdown (Connection Phases)

PhaseAmen.ptEsotéricoWinner
DNS Lookup180ms332msAmen.pt
TCP Connection83ms380msAmen.pt
TLS Handshake78ms140msAmen.pt
Server Processing41ms1790msAmen.pt
Total TTFB382ms2642msAmen.pt

Technology & Security Features

Amen.pt

Server/CDNUnknown
HSTS Enabled
Brotli Compression Disabled
HTTP/3 (QUIC) Disabled
Page Size137.0 KB

Esotérico

Server/CDNnginx
HSTS Disabled
Brotli Compression Disabled
HTTP/3 (QUIC) Disabled
Page Size117.8 KB
1/3
Amen.pt Security Features
0/3
Esotérico 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.