GitHub|Since 2007

grCretaForcevsDNHOSTgr

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

Test Date: 2/25/2026

WPTR ScoreWinner614 ms
Rank#172
TTFB469ms
Time to 1MB100ms
Score614
LCP869ms
FCP669ms
WPTR Score2017 ms
Rank#377
TTFB909ms
Time to 1MB135ms
Score2017
LCP1309ms
FCP1109ms

Our Verdict

CretaForce wins with 469ms TTFB (vs DNHOST's 909ms)

TTFB Breakdown (Connection Phases)

PhaseCretaForceDNHOSTWinner
DNS Lookup86ms233msCretaForce
TCP Connection104ms53msDNHOST
TLS Handshake65ms106msCretaForce
Server Processing119ms1301msCretaForce
Total TTFB374ms1693msCretaForce

Technology & Security Features

CretaForce

Server/CDNnginx
HSTS Disabled
Brotli Compression Disabled
HTTP/3 (QUIC) Disabled
Page Size192.2 KB

DNHOST

Server/CDNnginx
HSTS Disabled
Brotli Compression Disabled
HTTP/3 (QUIC) Disabled
Page Size90.9 KB
0/3
CretaForce Security Features
0/3
DNHOST 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.