GitHub|Since 2007

USHorizoniqvsRocket.netUS

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

Test Date: 2/23/2026

WPTR Score7773 ms
Rank#843
TTFB559ms
Time to 1MB2877ms
Score7773
LCP959ms
FCP759ms
WPTR ScoreWinner389 ms
Rank#21
TTFB32ms
Time to 1MB135ms
Score389
LCP432ms
FCP232ms

Our Verdict

Rocket.net wins with 32ms TTFB (vs Horizoniq's 559ms)

TTFB Breakdown (Connection Phases)

PhaseHorizoniqRocket.netWinner
DNS Lookup95ms28msRocket.net
TCP Connection9ms4msRocket.net
TLS Handshake11ms12msHorizoniq
Server Processing753ms21msRocket.net
Total TTFB868ms65msRocket.net

Technology & Security Features

Horizoniq

Server/CDNcloudflare
HSTS Disabled
Brotli Compression Enabled
HTTP/3 (QUIC) Enabled
Page Size115.3 KB

Rocket.net

Server/CDNcloudflare
HSTS Disabled
Brotli Compression Enabled
HTTP/3 (QUIC) Enabled
Page Size155.6 KB
2/3
Horizoniq Security Features
2/3
Rocket.net 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.