GitHub|Since 2007
Wptr Lab

DEContabovsgoneoDE

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

Test Date: 2/23/2026

Contabo
WPTR ScoreWinner362 ms
Rank#61
TTFB196ms
Time to 1MB108ms
Score362
LCP596ms
FCP396ms
goneo
WPTR Score1164 ms
Rank#324
TTFB167ms
Time to 1MB384ms
Score1164
LCP567ms
FCP367ms

Our Verdict

goneo wins with 167ms TTFB (vs Contabo's 196ms)

TTFB Breakdown (Connection Phases)

PhaseContabogoneoWinner
DNS Lookup1ms82msContabo
TCP Connection13ms43msContabo
TLS Handshake17ms50msContabo
Server Processing72ms67msgoneo
Total TTFB103ms242msgoneo

Technology & Security Features

Contabo

Server/CDNcloudflare
HSTS Enabled
Brotli Compression Enabled
HTTP/3 (QUIC) Enabled
Page Size2032.0 KB

goneo

Server/CDNApache
HSTS Disabled
Brotli Compression Disabled
HTTP/3 (QUIC) Disabled
Page Size43.3 KB
3/3
Contabo Security Features
0/3
goneo 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.