GitHub|Since 2007

noFastNamevsWebhusetno

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

Test Date: 2/25/2026

WPTR Score1914 ms
Rank#572
TTFB922ms
Time to 1MB479ms
Score1914
LCP1322ms
FCP1122ms
WPTR ScoreWinner968 ms
Rank#288
TTFB451ms
Time to 1MB232ms
Score968
LCP851ms
FCP651ms

Our Verdict

Webhuset wins with 451ms TTFB (vs FastName's 922ms)

TTFB Breakdown (Connection Phases)

PhaseFastNameWebhusetWinner
DNS Lookup122ms119msWebhuset
TCP Connection177ms61msWebhuset
TLS Handshake69ms121msFastName
Server Processing396ms110msWebhuset
Total TTFB764ms411msWebhuset

Technology & Security Features

FastName

Server/CDNopenresty
HSTS Enabled
Brotli Compression Disabled
HTTP/3 (QUIC) Disabled
Page Size57.0 KB

Webhuset

Server/CDNnginx
HSTS Enabled
Brotli Compression Disabled
HTTP/3 (QUIC) Enabled
Page Size49.3 KB
1/3
FastName Security Features
2/3
Webhuset 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.