GitHub|Since 2007
Wptr Lab

FRNameshieldvsOxevaFR

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

Test Date: 2/24/2026

Nameshield
WPTR Score2372 ms
Rank#576
TTFB805ms
Time to 1MB583ms
Score2372
LCP1205ms
FCP1005ms
Oxeva
WPTR ScoreWinner1144 ms
Rank#239
TTFB367ms
Time to 1MB229ms
Score1144
LCP767ms
FCP567ms

Our Verdict

Oxeva wins with 367ms TTFB (vs Nameshield's 805ms)

TTFB Breakdown (Connection Phases)

PhaseNameshieldOxevaWinner
DNS Lookup103ms219msNameshield
TCP Connection59ms274msNameshield
TLS Handshake69ms51msOxeva
Server Processing742ms50msOxeva
Total TTFB973ms594msOxeva

Technology & Security Features

Nameshield

Server/CDNApache
HSTS Enabled
Brotli Compression Disabled
HTTP/3 (QUIC) Disabled
Page Size218.3 KB

Oxeva

Server/CDNUnknown
HSTS Disabled
Brotli Compression Enabled
HTTP/3 (QUIC) Disabled
Page Size55.5 KB
1/3
Nameshield Security Features
1/3
Oxeva 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.