GitHub|Since 2007

ruEurobytevsHostlandru

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

Test Date: 2/25/2026

WPTR Score1106 ms
Rank#212
TTFB449ms
Time to 1MB150ms
Score1106
LCP849ms
FCP649ms
WPTR ScoreWinner839 ms
Rank#348
TTFB895ms
Time to 1MB109ms
Score839
LCP1295ms
FCP1095ms

Our Verdict

Eurobyte wins with 449ms TTFB (vs Hostland's 895ms)

TTFB Breakdown (Connection Phases)

PhaseEurobyteHostlandWinner
DNS Lookup76ms85msEurobyte
TCP Connection148ms145msHostland
TLS Handshake74ms84msEurobyte
Server Processing448ms263msHostland
Total TTFB746ms577msEurobyte

Technology & Security Features

Eurobyte

Server/CDNddos-guard
HSTS Disabled
Brotli Compression Disabled
HTTP/3 (QUIC) Disabled
Page Size85.8 KB

Hostland

Server/CDNnginx
HSTS Enabled
Brotli Compression Disabled
HTTP/3 (QUIC) Disabled
Page Size111.3 KB
0/3
Eurobyte Security Features
1/3
Hostland 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.