GitHub|Since 2007
Wptr Lab

sebeebytevsLoopiase

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

Test Date: 2/25/2026

beebyte
WPTR ScoreWinner1988 ms
Rank#590
TTFB527ms
Time to 1MB686ms
Score1988
LCP927ms
FCP727ms
Loopia
WPTR Score13826 ms
Rank#878
TTFB489ms
Time to 1MB5625ms
Score13826
LCP889ms
FCP689ms

Our Verdict

Loopia wins with 489ms TTFB (vs beebyte's 527ms)

TTFB Breakdown (Connection Phases)

PhasebeebyteLoopiaWinner
DNS Lookup85ms92msbeebyte
TCP Connection72ms95msbeebyte
TLS Handshake73ms65msLoopia
Server Processing112ms74msLoopia
Total TTFB342ms326msLoopia

Technology & Security Features

beebyte

Server/CDNApache/2.4.41 (Ubunt
HSTS Disabled
Brotli Compression Disabled
HTTP/3 (QUIC) Disabled
Page Size157.2 KB

Loopia

Server/CDNnginx
HSTS Enabled
Brotli Compression Disabled
HTTP/3 (QUIC) Disabled
Page Size53.5 KB
0/3
beebyte Security Features
1/3
Loopia 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.