GitHub|Since 2007
Wptr Lab

GBFifosysvsVirtuosoGB

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

Test Date: 2/24/2026

Fifosys
WPTR Score4873 ms
Rank#799
TTFB469ms
Time to 1MB1903ms
Score4873
LCP869ms
FCP669ms
Virtuoso
WPTR ScoreWinner852 ms
Rank#123
TTFB96ms
Time to 1MB209ms
Score852
LCP496ms
FCP296ms

Our Verdict

Virtuoso wins with 96ms TTFB (vs Fifosys's 469ms)

TTFB Breakdown (Connection Phases)

PhaseFifosysVirtuosoWinner
DNS Lookup137ms86msVirtuoso
TCP Connection56ms12msVirtuoso
TLS Handshake56ms20msVirtuoso
Server Processing57ms232msFifosys
Total TTFB306ms350msVirtuoso

Technology & Security Features

Fifosys

Server/CDNSquarespace
HSTS Enabled
Brotli Compression Disabled
HTTP/3 (QUIC) Disabled
Page Size228.3 KB

Virtuoso

Server/CDNcloudflare
HSTS Disabled
Brotli Compression Enabled
HTTP/3 (QUIC) Enabled
Page Size164.2 KB
1/3
Fifosys Security Features
2/3
Virtuoso 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.