Most Reliable Hosting Company Sites in January 2016
2nd February, 2016
|2||XILO Communications Ltd.||Linux||0:00:00||0.008||0.228||0.069||0.137||0.137|
|5||Qube Managed Services||Linux||0:00:00||0.013||0.151||0.059||0.120||0.120|
With just a single failed request, Datapipe had the most reliable hosting company site in January. It featured in the top ten for all but one month in 2015 and last topped the table in July.
In second place in January was XILO Communications Ltd with just two failed requests. XILO’s website has maintained 100% uptime over the past year, and 99.990% since October 2011. XILO’s servers are located in Maidenhead, just outside London, and use XILO’s own network hardware.
Netcetera came in third place, also with just two failed requests, albeit with a slightly longer average connection time. Netcetera is based on the Isle of Man and has recently expanded its Dataport data centre where it offers carbon neutral shared, dedicated, and cloud hosting, as well as co-location options.
GoDaddy reached fourth place in January, marking its eighth consecutive appearance in the top ten. Since June, GoDaddy has maintained an impressive average connection time of just under eight milliseconds, with no single month's average being more than nine milliseconds.
As it did through the entirety of 2015, Linux has once again dominated as the most commonly used operating system amongst the top ten hosting company websites. The only two companies in January’s table not using Linux to host their websites are Swishmail (FreeBSD) and EveryCity (SmartOS).
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.