Actualités informatiques

Most Reliable Hosting Company Sites in January 2019

Rank Performance Graph OS Failed
DNS Connect First
1 www.choopa.com Linux 0.000 0.258 0.012 0.170 0.170
2 EveryCity SmartOS 0.000 0.227 0.070 0.346 0.346
3 Bigstep Linux 0.000 0.225 0.071 0.145 0.145
4 Hyve Managed Hosting Linux 0.000 0.162 0.075 0.150 0.150
5 CWCS Managed Hosting Linux 0.000 0.285 0.081 0.156 0.156
6 www.dinahosting.com Linux 0.004 0.278 0.089 0.178 0.178
7 Pair Networks FreeBSD 0.004 0.335 0.095 0.192 0.192
8 www.viawest.com Linux 0.013 0.430 0.012 0.239 0.240
9 Netcetera Linux 0.017 0.195 0.084 0.167 0.167
10 Swishmail FreeBSD 0.021 0.228 0.086 0.172 0.173

See full table

Choopa.com had the most reliable hosting company website in January 2019, responding to all of Netcraft's requests. The company offers cloud hosting, dedicated servers, colocation and managed services from four locations across the US, Europe and Asia. Choopa.com's primary data centre is located in Piscataway, New Jersey.

EveryCity, Bigstep, Hyve Managed Hosting and CWCS Managed Hosting made up the rest of the top five, with their sites also responding to all of Netcraft's requests last month. The top five sites are separated by their average connection time. EveryCity has appeared in the top 10 hosting company sites over 35 times, maintaining 99.9994% uptime over 4 years. Bigstep has now made six consecutive appearances in the top 10 and maintained 99.97% uptime over 5 years.

Seven of the top ten most reliable hosting company websites used the Linux operating system in January. FreeBSD appears twice in the top ten, with SmartOS also making an appearance.

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.