GitHub|Since 2007
Wptr Lab

chMetanetvsNinech

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

Test Date: 2/24/2026

Metanet
WPTR ScoreWinner1460 ms
Rank#556
TTFB935ms
Time to 1MB479ms
Score1460
LCP1335ms
FCP1135ms
Nine
WPTR Score2272 ms
Rank#586
TTFB309ms
Time to 1MB818ms
Score2272
LCP709ms
FCP509ms

Our Verdict

Nine wins with 309ms TTFB (vs Metanet's 935ms)

TTFB Breakdown (Connection Phases)

PhaseMetanetNineWinner
DNS Lookup50ms89msMetanet
TCP Connection52ms108msMetanet
TLS Handshake77ms57msNine
Server Processing131ms55msNine
Total TTFB310ms309msNine

Technology & Security Features

Metanet

Server/CDNUnknown
HSTS Enabled
Brotli Compression Disabled
HTTP/3 (QUIC) Disabled
Page Size200.9 KB

Nine

Server/CDNUnknown
HSTS Enabled
Brotli Compression Disabled
HTTP/3 (QUIC) Disabled
Page Size181.5 KB
1/3
Metanet Security Features
1/3
Nine 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.