ChrootvsROMARG
Head-to-head hosting performance comparison based on real test data
Test Date: 2/25/2026

Chroot
View Details →
ROMARG
View Details →Our Verdict
Chroot wins with 210ms TTFB (vs ROMARG's 440ms)
TTFB Breakdown (Connection Phases)
| Phase | Chroot | ROMARG | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| DNS Lookup | 19ms | 202ms | Chroot |
| TCP Connection | 21ms | 123ms | Chroot |
| TLS Handshake | 22ms | 145ms | Chroot |
| Server Processing | 34ms | 78ms | Chroot |
| Total TTFB | 96ms | 548ms | Chroot |
Technology & Security Features
Chroot
ROMARG
TTFB Comparison Over Time
Understanding the Metrics
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.