GitHub|Since 2007

GBLittlefishvsNetitudeGB

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

Test Date: 2/24/2026

WPTR Score885 ms
Rank#507
TTFB1231ms
Time to 1MB252ms
Score885
LCP1631ms
FCP1431ms
WPTR ScoreWinner533 ms
Rank#29
TTFB90ms
Time to 1MB115ms
Score533
LCP490ms
FCP290ms

Our Verdict

Netitude wins with 90ms TTFB (vs Littlefish's 1231ms)

TTFB Breakdown (Connection Phases)

PhaseLittlefishNetitudeWinner
DNS Lookup39ms116msLittlefish
TCP Connection51ms4msNetitude
TLS Handshake100ms9msNetitude
Server Processing90ms128msLittlefish
Total TTFB280ms257msNetitude

Technology & Security Features

Littlefish

Server/CDNUnknown
HSTS Disabled
Brotli Compression Disabled
HTTP/3 (QUIC) Disabled
Page Size122.9 KB

Netitude

Server/CDNcloudflare
HSTS Enabled
Brotli Compression Enabled
HTTP/3 (QUIC) Enabled
Page Size207.5 KB
0/3
Littlefish Security Features
3/3
Netitude 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.