GitHub|Since 2007
Wptr Lab

USHorizoniqvsWebNXUS

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

Test Date: 2/23/2026

Horizoniq
WPTR Score7773 ms
Rank#843
TTFB559ms
Time to 1MB2877ms
Score7773
LCP959ms
FCP759ms
WebNX
WPTR ScoreWinner5153 ms
Rank#799
TTFB970ms
Time to 1MB1573ms
Score5153
LCP1370ms
FCP1170ms

Our Verdict

Horizoniq wins with 559ms TTFB (vs WebNX's 970ms)

TTFB Breakdown (Connection Phases)

PhaseHorizoniqWebNXWinner
DNS Lookup95ms397msHorizoniq
TCP Connection9ms621msHorizoniq
TLS Handshake11ms182msHorizoniq
Server Processing753ms178msWebNX
Total TTFB868ms1378msHorizoniq

Technology & Security Features

Horizoniq

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

WebNX

Server/CDNnginx
HSTS Disabled
Brotli Compression Disabled
HTTP/3 (QUIC) Disabled
Page Size2.1 KB
2/3
Horizoniq Security Features
0/3
WebNX 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.