Most Reliable Hosting Company Sites in August 2019

Rank Performance Graph OS Outage
hh:mm:ss
Failed
Req%
DNS Connect First
byte
Total
1 GoDaddy.com Inc Linux 0:00:00 0.000 0.405 0.004 0.022 0.023
2 CWCS Managed Hosting Linux 0:00:00 0.000 0.291 0.079 0.162 0.162
3 Hyve Managed Hosting Linux 0:00:00 0.000 0.157 0.084 0.168 0.168
4 Pair Networks Linux 0:00:00 0.000 0.324 0.092 0.185 0.185
5 www.dinahosting.com Linux 0:00:00 0.000 0.268 0.094 0.189 0.189
6 Aruba Windows Server 2012 0:00:00 0.000 0.275 0.105 0.213 0.213
7 Rackspace Linux 0:00:00 0.005 1.154 0.004 0.011 0.012
8 New York Internet (NYI) FreeBSD 0:00:00 0.005 0.537 0.054 0.107 0.107
9 ServerStack Linux 0:00:00 0.005 0.221 0.083 0.166 0.166
10 Multacom Linux 0:00:00 0.005 0.255 0.115 0.232 0.232

See full table

GoDaddy had the most reliable hosting company site in August 2019, with no failed requests and the fastest average connection time of 4ms. This is the second time in three months that GoDaddy has had the most reliable hosting company site. GoDaddy provides a wide range of hosting and domain registration services with 9 global data centres.

The top six hosting company sites each responded to all of Netcraft's requests and are separated by their average connection time. CWCS appears in second place in August and has been in the top 10 for three consecutive months. Italy-based hosting company Aruba appeared in sixth place. Aruba uses renewable energy, including hydro-electric and solar energy, to provide power to its green data centres, ensuring these data centres are energy efficient with zero net carbon impact.

Despite the decline of FreeBSD, it continues to appear in the top 10, as it powers the hosting company site for New York Internet (NYI). Windows Server 2012 also makes an appearance, but Linux continues to dominate, powering eight of the top 10 sites.

Netcraft measures and makes available the response times of around twenty 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.