GitHub|Since 2007
Wptr Lab

arIplanvsNeoloar

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

Test Date: 2/25/2026

Iplan
WPTR Score45531 ms
Rank#914
TTFB765ms
Time to 1MB18300ms
Score45531
LCP1165ms
FCP965ms
Neolo
WPTR ScoreWinner1688 ms
Rank#625
TTFB1290ms
Time to 1MB465ms
Score1688
LCP1690ms
FCP1490ms

Our Verdict

Iplan wins with 765ms TTFB (vs Neolo's 1290ms)

TTFB Breakdown (Connection Phases)

PhaseIplanNeoloWinner
DNS Lookup846ms34msNeolo
TCP Connection237ms183msNeolo
TLS Handshake239ms179msNeolo
Server Processing289ms176msNeolo
Total TTFB1611ms572msIplan

Technology & Security Features

Iplan

Server/CDNcloudflare
HSTS Disabled
Brotli Compression Disabled
HTTP/3 (QUIC) Disabled
Page Size9.4 KB

Neolo

Server/CDNApache
HSTS Disabled
Brotli Compression Disabled
HTTP/3 (QUIC) Disabled
Page Size18.8 KB
0/3
Iplan Security Features
0/3
Neolo 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.