GitHub|Since 2007
Wptr Lab

beNomeovsProximusbe

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

Test Date: 2/25/2026

Nomeo
WPTR Score2550 ms
Rank#685
TTFB254ms
Time to 1MB991ms
Score2550
LCP654ms
FCP454ms
Proximus
WPTR ScoreWinner1849 ms
Rank#593
TTFB795ms
Time to 1MB593ms
Score1849
LCP1195ms
FCP995ms

Our Verdict

Nomeo wins with 254ms TTFB (vs Proximus's 795ms)

TTFB Breakdown (Connection Phases)

PhaseNomeoProximusWinner
DNS Lookup118ms55msProximus
TCP Connection13ms103msNomeo
TLS Handshake18ms107msNomeo
Server Processing23ms161msNomeo
Total TTFB172ms426msNomeo

Technology & Security Features

Nomeo

Server/CDNcloudflare
HSTS Enabled
Brotli Compression Enabled
HTTP/3 (QUIC) Enabled
Page Size9.4 KB

Proximus

Server/CDNnginx
HSTS Enabled
Brotli Compression Disabled
HTTP/3 (QUIC) Disabled
Page Size159.8 KB
3/3
Nomeo Security Features
1/3
Proximus 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.