GitHub|Since 2007
Wptr Lab

bgICN.BgvsJump.bgbg

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

Test Date: 2/24/2026

ICN.Bg
WPTR Score791 ms
Rank#200
TTFB435ms
Time to 1MB158ms
Score791
LCP835ms
FCP635ms
Jump.bg
WPTR ScoreWinner489 ms
Rank#92
TTFB208ms
Time to 1MB128ms
Score489
LCP608ms
FCP408ms

Our Verdict

Jump.bg wins with 208ms TTFB (vs ICN.Bg's 435ms)

TTFB Breakdown (Connection Phases)

PhaseICN.BgJump.bgWinner
DNS Lookup42ms36msJump.bg
TCP Connection54ms16msJump.bg
TLS Handshake19ms31msICN.Bg
Server Processing297ms99msJump.bg
Total TTFB412ms182msJump.bg

Technology & Security Features

ICN.Bg

Server/CDNApache
HSTS Enabled
Brotli Compression Disabled
HTTP/3 (QUIC) Disabled
Page Size25.0 KB

Jump.bg

Server/CDNnginx/1.22.1
HSTS Enabled
Brotli Compression Disabled
HTTP/3 (QUIC) Disabled
Page Size577.0 KB
1/3
ICN.Bg Security Features
1/3
Jump.bg 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.