GitHub|Since 2007
Wptr Lab

roClaus WebvsROMARGro

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

Test Date: 2/25/2026

Claus Web
WPTR ScoreWinner705 ms
Rank#188
TTFB506ms
Time to 1MB102ms
Score705
LCP906ms
FCP706ms
ROMARG
WPTR Score1215 ms
Rank#327
TTFB440ms
Time to 1MB278ms
Score1215
LCP840ms
FCP640ms

Our Verdict

ROMARG wins with 440ms TTFB (vs Claus Web's 506ms)

TTFB Breakdown (Connection Phases)

PhaseClaus WebROMARGWinner
DNS Lookup105ms202msClaus Web
TCP Connection93ms123msClaus Web
TLS Handshake50ms145msClaus Web
Server Processing212ms78msROMARG
Total TTFB460ms548msROMARG

Technology & Security Features

Claus Web

Server/CDNnginx
HSTS Disabled
Brotli Compression Disabled
HTTP/3 (QUIC) Disabled
Page Size183.7 KB

ROMARG

Server/CDNLiteSpeed
HSTS Disabled
Brotli Compression Disabled
HTTP/3 (QUIC) Enabled
Page Size34.0 KB
0/3
Claus Web Security Features
1/3
ROMARG 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.