GitHub|Since 2007
Wptr Lab

FRAMENvsOxevaFR

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

Test Date: 2/24/2026

AMEN
WPTR Score1576 ms
Rank#417
TTFB203ms
Time to 1MB522ms
Score1576
LCP603ms
FCP403ms
Oxeva
WPTR ScoreWinner1144 ms
Rank#239
TTFB367ms
Time to 1MB229ms
Score1144
LCP767ms
FCP567ms

Our Verdict

AMEN wins with 203ms TTFB (vs Oxeva's 367ms)

TTFB Breakdown (Connection Phases)

PhaseAMENOxevaWinner
DNS Lookup44ms219msAMEN
TCP Connection131ms274msAMEN
TLS Handshake98ms51msOxeva
Server Processing50ms50msTie
Total TTFB323ms594msAMEN

Technology & Security Features

AMEN

Server/CDNUnknown
HSTS Enabled
Brotli Compression Disabled
HTTP/3 (QUIC) Disabled
Page Size145.6 KB

Oxeva

Server/CDNUnknown
HSTS Disabled
Brotli Compression Enabled
HTTP/3 (QUIC) Disabled
Page Size55.5 KB
1/3
AMEN Security Features
1/3
Oxeva 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.