Most Reliable Hosting Company Sites in July 2013

Rank Performance Graph OS Outage
hh:mm:ss
Failed
Req%
DNS Connect First
byte
Total
1 Swishmail FreeBSD 0:00:00 0.003 0.134 0.076 0.152 0.209
2 ServerStack Linux 0:00:00 0.003 0.096 0.078 0.158 0.158
3 iWeb Linux 0:00:00 0.003 0.146 0.083 0.166 0.166
4 Hyve Managed Hosting Linux 0:00:00 0.006 0.267 0.083 0.166 0.168
5 XILO Communications Linux 0:00:00 0.009 0.230 0.094 0.399 0.561
6 Qube Managed Services Linux 0:00:00 0.012 0.136 0.065 0.132 0.132
7 Virtual Internet Linux 0:00:00 0.015 0.164 0.089 0.383 0.594
8 Datapipe FreeBSD 0:00:00 0.018 0.089 0.031 0.062 0.095
9 New York Internet FreeBSD 0:00:00 0.018 0.142 0.079 0.159 0.491
10 Bigstep Linux 0:00:00 0.018 0.293 0.084 0.174 0.321

See full table

Swishmail had the most reliable hosting company site in July 2013. The New York based company failed to respond to only one of Netcraft's requests during the whole month, and had an average connection time of 0.076s. Swishmail primarily operates as an email hosting provider and uses three different data centers, run by Savvis, Level3 and Globix in New York City. Upstream connectivity is provided by Level3, Savvis, Cogent, AboveNet and Globix.

In second and third place, both also with only one failed request, were ServerStack and iWeb. ServerStack had the most reliable hosting company site during the previous month, and has data centers in New Jersey, San Jose and Amsterdam. iWeb's data centers in Montreal have a total dedicated server capacity of nearly 35,000.

For the second month in a row, none of July's top ten hosting companies were running on Windows operating systems. The most reliable hosting company site, Swishmail, was running on FreeBSD, as were two others sites within the top ten; the remaining seven were running on Linux. In terms of web server software, Apache was used by seven of the top ten sites, while nginx was used by three sites, including Swishmail's.

Netcraft measures and makes available the response times of around forty leading hosting providers' sites. The performance measurements are made at fifteen minute intervals from separate points around the internet, and averages are calculated over the immediately preceding 24 hour period.

From a customer's point of view, the percentage of failed requests is more pertinent than outages on hosting companies' own sites, as this gives a pointer to reliability of routing, and this is why we choose to rank our table by fewest failed requests, rather than shortest periods of outage. In the event the number of failed requests are equal then sites are ranked by average connection times.

Information on the measurement process and current measurements is available.