GitHub|Since 2007

GBBistechvsLittlefishGB

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

Test Date: 2/24/2026

WPTR ScoreWinner875 ms
Rank#193
TTFB422ms
Time to 1MB158ms
Score875
LCP822ms
FCP622ms
WPTR Score885 ms
Rank#507
TTFB1231ms
Time to 1MB252ms
Score885
LCP1631ms
FCP1431ms

Our Verdict

Bistech wins with 422ms TTFB (vs Littlefish's 1231ms)

TTFB Breakdown (Connection Phases)

PhaseBistechLittlefishWinner
DNS Lookup134ms39msLittlefish
TCP Connection169ms51msLittlefish
TLS Handshake130ms100msLittlefish
Server Processing63ms90msBistech
Total TTFB496ms280msBistech

Technology & Security Features

Bistech

Server/CDNnginx
HSTS Disabled
Brotli Compression Enabled
HTTP/3 (QUIC) Disabled
Page Size116.1 KB

Littlefish

Server/CDNUnknown
HSTS Disabled
Brotli Compression Disabled
HTTP/3 (QUIC) Disabled
Page Size122.9 KB
1/3
Bistech 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.