GitHub|Since 2007
Wptr Lab

AUConetixvsEquinixAU

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

Test Date: 2/24/2026

Conetix
WPTR Score6991 ms
Rank#830
TTFB1987ms
Time to 1MB1926ms
Score6991
LCP2387ms
FCP2187ms
Equinix
WPTR ScoreWinner574 ms
Rank#113
TTFB209ms
Time to 1MB155ms
Score574
LCP609ms
FCP409ms

Our Verdict

Equinix wins with 209ms TTFB (vs Conetix's 1987ms)

TTFB Breakdown (Connection Phases)

PhaseConetixEquinixWinner
DNS Lookup744ms6msEquinix
TCP Connection660ms94msEquinix
TLS Handshake317ms45msEquinix
Server Processing648ms57msEquinix
Total TTFB2369ms202msEquinix

Technology & Security Features

Conetix

Server/CDNnginx
HSTS Enabled
Brotli Compression Disabled
HTTP/3 (QUIC) Enabled
Page Size204.8 KB

Equinix

Server/CDNAkamaiGHost
HSTS Enabled
Brotli Compression Disabled
HTTP/3 (QUIC) Disabled
Page Size0.4 KB
2/3
Conetix Security Features
1/3
Equinix 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.