GitHub|Since 2007

roROMARGvsWebFactorro

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

Test Date: 2/25/2026

WPTR ScoreWinner1215 ms
Rank#327
TTFB440ms
Time to 1MB278ms
Score1215
LCP840ms
FCP640ms
WPTR Score9762 ms
Rank#860
TTFB357ms
Time to 1MB3630ms
Score9762
LCP757ms
FCP557ms

Our Verdict

WebFactor wins with 357ms TTFB (vs ROMARG's 440ms)

TTFB Breakdown (Connection Phases)

PhaseROMARGWebFactorWinner
DNS Lookup202ms167msWebFactor
TCP Connection123ms160msROMARG
TLS Handshake145ms44msWebFactor
Server Processing78ms679msROMARG
Total TTFB548ms1050msWebFactor

Technology & Security Features

ROMARG

Server/CDNLiteSpeed
HSTS Disabled
Brotli Compression Disabled
HTTP/3 (QUIC) Enabled
Page Size34.0 KB

WebFactor

Server/CDNApache
HSTS Disabled
Brotli Compression Disabled
HTTP/3 (QUIC) Disabled
Page Size50.0 KB
1/3
ROMARG Security Features
0/3
WebFactor 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.