GitHub|Since 2007
Wptr Lab

ruIHCvsReg.ruRU

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

Test Date: 2/25/2026

IHC
WPTR ScoreWinner1111 ms
Rank#270
TTFB478ms
Time to 1MB197ms
Score1111
LCP878ms
FCP678ms
Reg.ru
WPTR Score1452 ms
Rank#634
TTFB1375ms
Time to 1MB442ms
Score1452
LCP1775ms
FCP1575ms

Our Verdict

IHC wins with 478ms TTFB (vs Reg.ru's 1375ms)

TTFB Breakdown (Connection Phases)

PhaseIHCReg.ruWinner
DNS Lookup155ms81msReg.ru
TCP Connection105ms153msIHC
TLS Handshake53ms84msIHC
Server Processing325ms73msReg.ru
Total TTFB638ms391msIHC

Technology & Security Features

IHC

Server/CDNddos-guard
HSTS Disabled
Brotli Compression Disabled
HTTP/3 (QUIC) Enabled
Page Size118.0 KB

Reg.ru

Server/CDNsw
HSTS Enabled
Brotli Compression Disabled
HTTP/3 (QUIC) Disabled
Page Size13.2 KB
1/3
IHC Security Features
1/3
Reg.ru 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.