Most Reliable Hosting Company Sites in November 2016

Rank Performance Graph OS Outage
hh:mm:ss
Failed
Req%
DNS Connect First
byte
Total
1 Datapipe Linux 0:00:00 0.000 0.130 0.012 0.025 0.032
2 Qube Managed Services Linux 0:00:00 0.000 0.130 0.058 0.119 0.119
3 CWCS Linux 0:00:00 0.004 0.213 0.070 0.175 0.175
4 Anexia Linux 0:00:00 0.004 0.245 0.081 0.176 0.176
5 One.com Linux 0:00:00 0.009 0.180 0.038 0.108 0.108
6 New York Internet FreeBSD 0:00:00 0.017 0.340 0.026 0.055 0.217
7 Netcetera Linux 0:00:00 0.017 0.094 0.074 0.151 0.151
8 EveryCity SmartOS 0:00:00 0.026 0.110 0.072 0.146 0.146
9 Aruba Windows Server 2012 0:00:00 0.039 0.176 0.080 0.168 0.168
10 www.viawest.com Linux 0:00:00 0.048 0.272 0.006 0.200 0.200

See full table

Datapipe had the most reliable hosting company site in November, successfully responding to all requests. Datapipe has been in the top ten for ten months in 2016 and has a 100% uptime record over the last ten years. Datapipe was named as the top Cloud Service Provider for 2016 by Talkin’ Cloud in their 2016 Cloud 100 Research report.

Qube Managed Services took second place also with no failed requests, but a slower average connection time than Datapipe. Qube has been in the top ten for nine months this year, including last month when they topped the list. Qube has data centres in London, New York, and Zurich, offering cloud services, managed services, and colocation.

CWCS came in third place with only one failed request in November, narrowly beating Anexia which also had one failed request, but a slightly slower average connection time. CWCS was awarded PCI DSS Level 1 Service Provider Status in August for its primary data centre in Nottingham.

Linux is again the predominantly used operating system, powering seven of the top ten company sites. EveryCity continues to be the only provider in the top 10 that uses 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.