This year the benchmarks have a new home.
2021 WordPress and WooCommerce results are published there. The site displays them a lot more nicely than I even could given the restraints of this current site.
In case you forget the domain name I also redirected:
WPHostingPerformanceBenchmarks.com
WPHostingBenchmark.com
WCBenchmarks.com (redirecting to WooCommerce results!)
In June, I was the opening speaker for the inaugural HostCamp in Berlin, which was a side event for the larger WordCamp Europe.
My topic presentation and topic was Ethics in WordPress Hosting. It was a topic the event organizer, Jonathan Wold, and I talked about at length. The goal was to start a discussion about ethical issues facing the industry, what sort of behavior and policies people have and how to address them.
The event was by invitation and I cannot discuss what others shared because that was in private. My goal was to convince web hosting company executives that ethics matter, not just for the sake of being ethical. I wanted to show how even perceived unethical behavior could financially harm companies today with social media. So please act properly, it's in your best financial interest. One of the case studies is Digital Ocean which I wrote about and inspired the talk.
The benchmarks are available here
WordPress.com VIP participated for the second time in our WordPress Hosting Performance Benchmarks (2018). This review is based off the results of that test. This year WordPress.com VIP entered in the same Enterprise price tier again.
In the previous test, WP.com VIP aced the Enterprise test and earned the Top Tier WordPress Hosting Performance award from Review Signal. Considering who is behind it, the expectations behind WP.com VIP are enormous.
| Plan Name | Plan Monthly Price | Plan Visitors Allowed | Plan Memory/RAM | Plan Disk Space | Plan Bandwidth |
Plan Sites Allowed
|
| WordPress.com VIP | $5,000 | Unlimited | Unlimited | Unlimited | Unlimited | 5 |
| Plan Tier | Total Requests | Total Errors | Peak RPS | Average RPS | Peak Response Time(ms) | Average Response Time (ms) | Total Data Transferred (GB) | Peak Throughput (MB/s) | Average Throughput (MB/s) |
| Enterprise | 1,749,966 | 3 | 1,400.53 | 972.2 | 7,484 | 108 | 147.94 | 118.68 | 82.19 |
The Load Storm test is designed to simulate real users coming to the site, logging in and browsing the site bursting some of the caching mechanisms typically found on managed WordPress hosts.
Three errors out of 1.75 million requests. VIP also had the fastest average response time at 108ms. Simply astonishing.
| Plan Tier | Requests | Errors | Data Transferred (GB) | Peak Average Load Time (Seconds) | Peak Average Bandwidth (Mbps) |
Peak Average Requests/Sec
|
| Enterprise | 2085775 | 6 | 119.88 | 0.102 | 1860 | 3960 |
The Load Impact test makes sure static caching is effective so that if a page gets a lot of traffic the site will keep responding without issue.
Six errors in over 2 million requests is another top notch performance. VIP also had the lowest average response time of any company.
| Plan Tier | UptimeRobot | StatusCake |
| Enterprise | 99.95 | 100 |
The uptime results were great. 100 and 99.95% is very respectable.
| Plan Tier | Enterprise |
| Dulles | 0.334 |
| Denver | 1.112 |
| LA | 0.649 |
| London | 0.444 |
| Frankfurt | 0.353 |
| Rose Hill, Mauritius | 0.874 |
| Singapore | 0.395 |
| Mumbai | 0.544 |
| Japan | 0.358 |
| Sydney | 0.506 |
| Brazil | 0.363 |
I rarely comment about WebPageTest results but WordPress.com VIP deserves a special mention here. There were 11 test locations and VIP was the fastest in 9/11 and was 22 ms and 9 ms behind the fastest in the other two test locations. I've never seen any company be so dominant across the globe in terms of performance.
| Plan Tier | PHP Bench | WP Bench |
| Enterprise | 9.18 | 798.084597 |
The WPPerformanceTester results were normal.
WordPress.com VIP's sophomore performance didn't experience a slump. In fact, they seemed to have stepped up their game. Not only did they put on a better Load Storm performance, their response times across the globe were fantastic. WordPress.com VIP earned themselves a second Top Tier WordPress Hosting Performance award this year and was quite a stand out in many regards in a very crowded and well performing field.
WPEngine [Reviews] participated for the fifth time in our WordPress Hosting Performance Benchmarks (2018). This review is based off the results of that test. This year WPEngine entered in the Enterprise tier again. In the previous test, WPEngine struggled with the load tests. They returned this year and entered with the most expensive offering in the Enterprise tier and earned themselves a Top Tier WordPress Hosting Performance award.
| Plan Name | Plan Monthly Price | Plan Visitors Allowed | Plan Memory/RAM | Plan Disk Space | Plan Bandwidth |
Plan Sites Allowed
|
| Premium Dedicated | $5,400 | Capable of 10M+ (no hard limit, depends on site) | N/A | 1TB | Unlimited | 150 |
| Plan Tier | Total Requests | Total Errors | Peak RPS | Average RPS | Peak Response Time(ms) | Average Response Time (ms) | Total Data Transferred (GB) | Peak Throughput (MB/s) | Average Throughput (MB/s) |
| Enterprise | 1,914,457 | 786 | 1,564.62 | 1,063.59 | 11,541 | 509 | 115.54 | 95.23 | 64.19 |
The Load Storm test is designed to simulate real users coming to the site, logging in and browsing the site bursting some of the caching mechanisms typically found on managed WordPress hosts.
WPEngine's Load Storm test was good. Minimal errors and stable response time.
| Plan Tier | Requests | Errors | Data Transferred (GB) | Peak Average Load Time (Seconds) | Peak Average Bandwidth (Mbps) |
Peak Average Requests/Sec
|
| Enterprise | 1461819 | 0 | 78 | 0.665 | 1210 | 2780 |
The Load Impact test makes sure static caching is effective so that if a page gets a lot of traffic the site will keep responding without issue.
Zero errors, that's the magic number we love to see. WP Engine aced the Load Impact test.
| Plan Tier | UptimeRobot | StatusCake |
| Enterprise | 99.95 | 99.96 |
WPEngine [Reviews] maintained above 99.9% uptime on both monitors.
| Plan Tier | Enterprise |
| Dulles | 0.436 |
| Denver | 1.155 |
| LA | 0.948 |
| London | 1.155 |
| Frankfurt | 1 |
| Rose Hill, Mauritius | 2.109 |
| Singapore | 1.536 |
| Mumbai | 1.891 |
| Japan | 1.062 |
| Sydney | 1.428 |
| Brazil | 1.238 |
The response times on WPT were normal.
| Plan Tier | PHP Bench | WP Bench |
| Enterprise | 10.766 | 418.4100418 |
The WPPerformanceTester results normal.
After a disappointing 2016 showing, WPEngine [Reviews] stepped up their game and earned a Top Tier WordPress Hosting Performance award from Review Signal. It's always good to see companies working to improve their service offering. WPEngine is one of the oldest companies in the WordPress hosting space and they are showing they can support even the largest clients as many new competitors spring up. Great performance from WP Engine.
WP Oven participated for the third time in our WordPress Hosting Performance Benchmarks (2018). This review is based off the results of that test. This year WP Oven moved up a tier to the $51-100 price tier.
In the previous test, WP oven achieved perfection and earned themselves Top Tier status from Review Signal. They had zero errors on every test and perfect uptime.
| Plan Name | Plan Monthly Price | Plan Visitors Allowed | Plan Memory/RAM | Plan Disk Space | Plan Bandwidth |
Plan Sites Allowed
|
| Professional | $79.95 | Unlimited | 8GB | 80GB | 8 TB | Unlimited Sites |
| Plan Tier | Total Requests | Total Errors | Peak RPS | Average RPS | Peak Response Time(ms) | Average Response Time (ms) | Total Data Transferred (GB) | Peak Throughput (MB/s) | Average Throughput (MB/s) |
| $51-100 | 438,758 | 1 | 342.95 | 243.75 | 10,051 | 370 | 30.96 | 25.71 | 17.2 |
The Load Storm test is designed to simulate real users coming to the site, logging in and browsing the site bursting some of the caching mechanisms typically found on managed WordPress hosts.
WP Oven had a whopping single error on Load Storm and kept a sub 400ms response time. This was the fewest of any company in the price tier. An excellent showing.
| Plan Tier | Requests | Errors | Data Transferred (GB) | Peak Average Load Time (Seconds) | Peak Average Bandwidth (Mbps) |
Peak Average Requests/Sec
|
| $51-100 | 675881 | 0 | 36.07 | 0.398 | 619 | 1380 |
The Load Impact test makes sure static caching is effective so that if a page gets a lot of traffic the site will keep responding without issue.
WP Oven had zero errors and kept a sub 400ms response time. Perfect.
| Plan Tier | UptimeRobot | StatusCake |
| $51-100 | 99.98 | 99.97 |
Both monitors were above 99.9%, which is good.
| Plan Tier | $51-100 |
| Dulles | 0.406 |
| Denver | 1.118 |
| LA | 0.739 |
| London | 1.124 |
| Frankfurt | 1.206 |
| Rose Hill, Mauritius | 2.04 |
| Singapore | 2.103 |
| Mumbai | 2.221 |
| Japan | 1.421 |
| Sydney | 2.099 |
| Brazil | 1.316 |
The WPT results look normal.
| Plan Tier | PHP Bench | WP Bench |
| $51-100 | 9.634 | 211.1040743 |
The WPPerformanceTester results are normal.
WP Oven proved they could step up a price tier in 2018 and still earn itself Review Signal's Top Tier WordPress Hosting Performance award. It's nice to see a relatively unknown company do consistently well in our benchmarks. Another year, another great performance, keep up the great work WP Oven!
Kinsta participated for the fourth time in our WordPress Hosting Performance Benchmarks (2018). This review is based off the results of that test. This year Kinsta participated in the 25-50, 51-100, 101-200, 201-500, and Enterprise price tiers.
In the previous test, Kinsta earned Top Tier status in all four price brackets it entered. In 2018, Kinsta started offering cheaper plans and has competed in an additional, lower price tier.
| Plan Name | Plan Monthly Price | Plan Visitors Allowed | Plan Memory/RAM | Plan Disk Space | Plan Bandwidth |
Plan Sites Allowed
|
| Starter | $30 | 20000 | - | 5GB | Unlimited | 1 |
| Pro | $60 | 40,000 | - | 5GB | Unlimited | 2 |
| Business 1 | $100 | 100,000 | - | 10GB | Unlimited | 3 |
| Business 2 | $200 | 250000 | - | 20GB SSD | Unlimited | 10 |
| Enterprise 1 | $600 | 1 Million | - | 80GB SSD | Unlimited | 60 |
| Plan Tier | Total Requests | Total Errors | Peak RPS | Average RPS | Peak Response Time(ms) | Average Response Time (ms) | Total Data Transferred (GB) | Peak Throughput (MB/s) | Average Throughput (MB/s) |
| $25-50 | 294,176 | 3 | 225.5 | 163.43 | 10,036 | 355 | 21.38 | 17.58 | 11.88 |
| $51-100 | 425,597 | 1 | 332.65 | 236.44 | 10,017 | 377 | 30.98 | 25.62 | 17.21 |
| $101-200 | 556,007 | 48 | 436.15 | 308.89 | 10,101 | 375 | 40.45 | 32.44 | 22.47 |
| $200-500 | 688,856 | 0 | 543.12 | 382.7 | 4,407 | 358 | 50.08 | 40.47 | 27.82 |
| Enterprise | 1,720,465 | 0 | 1,391.42 | 955.81 | 3,906 | 417 | 112.7 | 91.9 | 62.61 |
The Load Storm test is designed to simulate real users coming to the site, logging in and browsing the site bursting some of the caching mechanisms typically found on managed WordPress hosts.
Kinsta aced the Load Storm tests across every tier. Zero errors in multiple price tiers and minimal errors in the others. The response times were kept fast and stable. It scaled up from the smallest test to Enterprise test without issue.
| Plan Tier | Requests | Errors | Data Transferred (GB) | Peak Average Load Time (Seconds) | Peak Average Bandwidth (Mbps) |
Peak Average Requests/Sec
|
| $25-50 | 337031 | 0 | 18.05 | 0.41 | 304 | 694 |
| $51-100 | 672240 | 0 | 36 | 0.416 | 583 | 1300 |
| $101-200 | 1016163 | 0 | 54.42 | 0.395 | 863 | 1920 |
| $200-500 | 1014718 | 0 | 54.34 | 0.411 | 866 | 1930 |
| Enterprise | 1367747 | 0 | 73.4 | 0.802 | 1120 | 2540 |
The Load Impact test makes sure static caching is effective so that if a page gets a lot of traffic the site will keep responding without issue.
Perfection. Zero errors across 5 separate tests.
| Plan Tier | UptimeRobot | StatusCake |
| $25-50 | 100 | 100 |
| $51-100 | 100 | 100 |
| $101-200 | 100 | 100 |
| $200-500 | 100 | 100 |
| Enterprise | 100 | 100 |
Perfect. 100% across 5 plans and two separate monitors.
| Plan Tier | $25-50 | $51-100 | $101-200 | $200-500 | Enterprise |
| Dulles | 0.387 | 0.373 | 0.377 | 0.396 | 0.382 |
| Denver | 1.287 | 1.163 | 1.411 | 1.134 | 1.245 |
| LA | 0.833 | 0.79 | 0.81 | 0.832 | 1.154 |
| London | 1.076 | 1.104 | 1.073 | 1.177 | 1.331 |
| Frankfurt | 1.014 | 1.009 | 1.01 | 1.031 | 1.103 |
| Rose Hill, Mauritius | 2.436 | 2.446 | 2.433 | 2.439 | 2.444 |
| Singapore | 1.902 | 1.729 | 1.728 | 1.712 | 1.774 |
| Mumbai | 2.114 | 2.279 | 2.221 | 2.119 | 2.108 |
| Japan | 1.186 | 1.183 | 1.234 | 1.268 | 1.281 |
| Sydney | 1.609 | 1.766 | 1.763 | 1.772 | 1.611 |
| Brazil | 1.513 | 1.364 | 1.384 | 1.508 | 1.404 |
WPT test results looked normal.
| Plan Tier | PHP Bench | WP Bench |
| $25-50 | 8.853 | 1036.26943 |
| $51-100 | 8.783 | 1173.70892 |
| $101-200 | 8.974 | 1100.110011 |
| $200-500 | 9.048 | 1047.120419 |
| Enterprise | 8.787 | 1207.729469 |
The WPPerformanceTester results looked normal. The WP Bench results stood out though. The database connections are consistently very fast compared to their competitors at higher price tiers when plans tend to run separate and/or multiple database servers.
Kinsta earned itself five Top Tier WordPress Hosting Performance Awards in 2018. It had perfect uptime across every plan. It had zero errors on Load Impact. It had 2/5 Load Storm tests without any errors and only 52 errors total from 3.685 million requests. No signs of stress showed on any test. Kinsta has consistently brought their A game to WordPress Hosting Performance Benchmarks, this year was no exception. It's nice to see them offering newer, cheaper plans that allow people on smaller budgets access their offerings. A huge congratulations to them for earning the most Top Tier Hosting Performance awards of any company in 2018.
WordPress & WooCommerce Hosting Performance Benchmarks 2021
WooCommerce Hosting Performance Benchmarks 2020
WordPress Hosting Performance Benchmarks (2020)
The Case for Regulatory Capture at ICANN
WordPress Hosting – Does Price Give Better Performance?
Hostinger Review – 0 Stars for Lack of Ethics
The Sinking of Site5 – Tracking EIG Brands Post Acquisition
Dirty, Slimy, Shady Secrets of the Web Hosting Review (Under)World – Episode 1
Free Web Hosting Offers for StartupsDisclaimer: Review Signal LLC is compensated by some companies for referring new customers.
Please read our How It Works section for more information and details about how our system works.
Interested in seeing which web hosting companies people love (and hate!)? Click here and find out how your web host stacks up.
