GitHub|Since 2007
Wptr Lab

DEMittwaldvsPixel XDE

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

Test Date: 2/23/2026

Mittwald
WPTR ScoreWinner1700 ms
Rank#496
TTFB204ms
Time to 1MB604ms
Score1700
LCP604ms
FCP404ms
Pixel X
WPTR Score25128 ms
Rank#901
TTFB130ms
Time to 1MB10371ms
Score25128
LCP530ms
FCP330ms

Our Verdict

Pixel X wins with 130ms TTFB (vs Mittwald's 204ms)

TTFB Breakdown (Connection Phases)

PhaseMittwaldPixel XWinner
DNS Lookup49ms94msMittwald
TCP Connection57ms46msPixel X
TLS Handshake58ms52msPixel X
Server Processing86ms46msPixel X
Total TTFB250ms238msPixel X

Technology & Security Features

Mittwald

Server/CDNUnknown
HSTS Enabled
Brotli Compression Disabled
HTTP/3 (QUIC) Disabled
Page Size154.3 KB

Pixel X

Server/CDNnginx
HSTS Disabled
Brotli Compression Disabled
HTTP/3 (QUIC) Disabled
Page Size21.7 KB
1/3
Mittwald Security Features
0/3
Pixel X 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.