|2||New York Internet (NYI)||FreeBSD||0:00:00||0.000||0.545||0.060||0.118||0.118|
|7||CWCS Managed Hosting||Linux||0:00:00||0.005||0.317||0.082||0.163||0.163|
|10||Hyve Managed Hosting||Linux||0:00:00||0.010||0.160||0.076||0.151||0.151|
See full table
Rackspace kicked off 2021 with the most reliable hosting company site in January. The top five hosting company sites each responded to all of Netcraft’s requests in January and were separated by average connection time. Rackspace offers a variety of cloud hosting solutions from 40 data centres across five different continents in the Americas, Europe, Asia and Australia.
The podium is completed by New York Internet (NYI) and EveryCity. NYI offers bare metal, cloud and colocation services from its four data centres in the US. UK-based EveryCity provides cloud hosting solutions and managed third-party services from its primary data centre located in the heart of London.
ServerStack and dinahosting also responded to all of Netcraft’s requests in January. ServerStack maintains its place in the top 10 and has now appeared 11 times in the past 12 months, more than any other hosting company site. ServerStack provides managed and dedicated solutions from its three data centres in North America and Europe. dinahosting offers its services from Interxion, in Madrid, and customers can choose from a range of cloud and managed solutions as well as register domain names.
FreeBSD appeared in second place in January with NYI and SmartOS appeared in third place with EveryCity. Linux was used by the other eight sites in the top 10.
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.