GitHub|Since 2007
Wptr Lab

chcyonvsSwizzonicch

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

Test Date: 2/24/2026

cyon
WPTR Score2249 ms
Rank#581
TTFB600ms
Time to 1MB682ms
Score2249
LCP1000ms
FCP800ms
Swizzonic
WPTR ScoreWinner667 ms
Rank#176
TTFB507ms
Time to 1MB102ms
Score667
LCP907ms
FCP707ms

Our Verdict

Swizzonic wins with 507ms TTFB (vs cyon's 600ms)

TTFB Breakdown (Connection Phases)

PhasecyonSwizzonicWinner
DNS Lookup124ms7msSwizzonic
TCP Connection72ms65msSwizzonic
TLS Handshake72ms101mscyon
Server Processing344ms249msSwizzonic
Total TTFB612ms422msSwizzonic

Technology & Security Features

cyon

Server/CDNUnknown
HSTS Enabled
Brotli Compression Enabled
HTTP/3 (QUIC) Enabled
Page Size255.2 KB

Swizzonic

Server/CDNnginx
HSTS Enabled
Brotli Compression Disabled
HTTP/3 (QUIC) Disabled
Page Size134.2 KB
3/3
cyon Security Features
1/3
Swizzonic 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.