GitHub|Since 2007

USLinodevsMDDHostingUS

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

Test Date: 2/23/2026

WPTR Score2226 ms
Rank#599
TTFB170ms
Time to 1MB833ms
Score2226
LCP570ms
FCP370ms
WPTR ScoreWinner1301 ms
Rank#295
TTFB453ms
Time to 1MB233ms
Score1301
LCP853ms
FCP653ms

Our Verdict

Linode wins with 170ms TTFB (vs MDDHosting's 453ms)

TTFB Breakdown (Connection Phases)

PhaseLinodeMDDHostingWinner
DNS Lookup70ms7msMDDHosting
TCP Connection36ms14msMDDHosting
TLS Handshake38ms19msMDDHosting
Server Processing83ms702msLinode
Total TTFB227ms742msLinode

Technology & Security Features

Linode

Server/CDNUnknown
HSTS Enabled
Brotli Compression Disabled
HTTP/3 (QUIC) Enabled
Page Size157.4 KB

MDDHosting

Server/CDNcloudflare
HSTS Enabled
Brotli Compression Enabled
HTTP/3 (QUIC) Enabled
Page Size65.3 KB
2/3
Linode Security Features
3/3
MDDHosting 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.