{"id":1695,"date":"2016-11-03T09:04:27","date_gmt":"2016-11-03T13:04:27","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/reviewsignal.com\/blog\/?p=1695"},"modified":"2016-11-01T12:28:47","modified_gmt":"2016-11-01T16:28:47","slug":"liquidweb-wordpress-hosting-review-2016","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/reviewsignal.com\/blog\/2016\/11\/03\/liquidweb-wordpress-hosting-review-2016\/","title":{"rendered":"LiquidWeb WordPress Hosting Review (2016)"},"content":{"rendered":"

LiquidWeb<\/a> was a first\u00a0time participant in WordPress Hosting Performance Benchmarks<\/a>. They have been around for a long time in the managed web hosting space but only recently entered the WordPress space. They have consistently been one of the top companies tracked at Review Signal<\/a> winning numerous awards<\/a>\u00a0for their shared and VPS hosting.<\/p>\n

Those are some pretty big expectations to meet when you enter a space that is already full of many competitors and being the new kid on the block. The only other first time participant that did as well was WordPress.com VIP, which isn't a new entrant into the space, but only this testing.<\/p>\n

Products<\/h2>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n<\/colgroup>\n\n\n\n\n
Company \/ Price Bracket<\/td>\nPlan<\/td>\nMonthly Price<\/td>\nVisitors Allowed<\/td>\nDisk Space<\/td>\nBandwidth<\/td>\nSites Allowed<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
LiquidWeb 51-100<\/td>\nPersonal<\/td>\n$89<\/td>\nUnlimited<\/td>\n100GB SSD<\/td>\n5 TB<\/td>\n10<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
LiquidWeb 101-200<\/td>\nProfessional<\/td>\n$149<\/td>\nUnlimited<\/td>\n150GB SSD<\/td>\n5 TB<\/td>\n20<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

View Full Product Details<\/a><\/p>\n

Performance Review<\/h2>\n

LoadStorm Results<\/h3>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n<\/colgroup>\n\n\n\n\n
Company \/ Price Bracket<\/td>\nTotal Requests<\/td>\nTotal Errors<\/td>\nPeak RPS<\/td>\nAverage RPS<\/td>\nPeak Response Time(ms)<\/td>\nAverage Response Time(ms)<\/td>\nTotal Data Transferred (GB)<\/td>\nPeak Throughput (MB\/s)<\/td>\nAverage Throughput (MB\/s)<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
LiquidWeb 51-100<\/a><\/td>\n520072<\/td>\n2745<\/td>\n408.3<\/td>\n288.93<\/td>\n15322<\/td>\n525<\/td>\n24.04<\/td>\n19.69<\/td>\n13.35<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
LiquidWeb 101-200<\/a><\/td>\n635893<\/td>\n76<\/td>\n490.78<\/td>\n353.27<\/td>\n15097<\/td>\n360<\/td>\n31.3<\/td>\n25.19<\/td>\n17.39<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

LoadStorm test logged in thousands of users to simulate heavy uncached load on the server, scaling up with more users on larger plans after the $25-50\/month range.\u00a0LiquidWeb<\/a> handled these tests with relative ease. The larger plan did better managing a faster average response time and having fewer errors. But both results were top tier performances.<\/p>\n

Blitz Results<\/h3>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n<\/colgroup>\n\n\n\n\n
Company \/ Price Bracket<\/td>\nHits<\/td>\nErrors<\/td>\nTimeouts<\/td>\nAverage Hits\/Second<\/td>\nAverage Response Time<\/td>\nFastest Response<\/td>\nSlowest Response<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
LiquidWeb 51-100<\/td>\n54574<\/td>\n0<\/td>\n4<\/td>\n910<\/td>\n78<\/td>\n77<\/td>\n82<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
LiquidWeb 101-200<\/td>\n81393<\/td>\n47<\/td>\n10<\/td>\n1357<\/td>\n80<\/td>\n76<\/td>\n118<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

The Blitz test is designed to make sure that static assets (which should be served from cache) are being handled properly and can scale to very heavy big spikes in traffic. If the LoadStorm test was a clinic, this was absolute perfection.\u00a0LiquidWeb<\/a> had minimal issues with the Blitz test. A very minor spike up to 118ms on the bigger test is the only noticeable thing. Again, top tier performances.<\/p>\n

Uptime<\/h3>\n\n\n\n\n<\/colgroup>\n\n\n\n\n
Company<\/td>\nStatusCake<\/td>\nUptimeRobot<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
LiquidWeb 51-100<\/td>\n100<\/td>\n100<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
LiquidWeb 101-200<\/td>\n100<\/td>\n100<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

 <\/p>\n

Perfect.<\/p>\n

WebPageTest \/ WPPerformanceTester<\/h3>\n

I mention these because they are in the full testing but I won't bother putting them here. No company had any significant issue with either and it's not worth writing about. If you're very interested in seeing the geographical response times on WPT<\/a> or what the raw computing power test of WPPerformanceTester<\/a> measured, read the full results<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Conclusion<\/h2>\n

LiquidWeb<\/a> earned Top Tier WordPress Hosting Performance for both plans it entered. It's product line starts in the mid-range price wise and goes up. They definitely have the performance to match the pricing. Absolutely perfect uptime was nice to see too. I'm pleased to see they bring their strong reputation to this market with a strong product that matches the quality people have come to expect from LiquidWeb<\/a>.<\/p>\n

\"liquidweb-wordpress\"<\/a><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

LiquidWeb was a first\u00a0time participant in WordPress Hosting Performance Benchmarks. They have been around for a long time in the managed web hosting space but only recently entered the WordPress space. They have consistently been one of the top companies tracked at Review Signal winning numerous awards\u00a0for their shared and VPS hosting. Those are some […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":1697,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[7,199],"tags":[157,19,74,200,48],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/reviewsignal.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1695"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/reviewsignal.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/reviewsignal.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/reviewsignal.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/reviewsignal.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1695"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/reviewsignal.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1695\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1713,"href":"https:\/\/reviewsignal.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1695\/revisions\/1713"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/reviewsignal.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/1697"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/reviewsignal.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1695"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/reviewsignal.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1695"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/reviewsignal.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1695"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}