|2||Hyve Managed Hosting||Linux||0:00:00||0.015||0.220||0.061||0.123||0.124|
|5||Qube Managed Services||Linux||0:00:00||0.019||0.096||0.036||0.073||0.073|
Anexia had the most reliable hosting company site in July, with three failed requests. This is Anexia’s second appearance in the top 10 in 2014, and the first time it’s topped the table since Netcraft starting monitoring its performance. The Europe-based IT service provider operates infrastructure in across the world, and has maintained a 100% uptime record over the past year. Last year, Anexia was ranked #136 in Deloitte’s Technology Fast500 EMEA, which recognizes the top 500 fastest-growing technology companies in Europe, the Middle East & Africa.
Coming in close behind are Hyve Managed Hosting (second most reliable), EveryCity (third), and Aspserveur (fourth). As all three hosting companies had the same number of failed requests in July, the tie was broken by examining the average connection time.
This is Hyve Managed Hosting’s third consecutive month in the top ten. Hyve have recently been appointed to G-Cloud V, the UK Government cloud computing initiative. It will offer a variety of cloud computing services to government departments, local authorities and public sector organisations across the country.
Serverstack ranked sixth with five failed requests, marking its third appearance in the top ten in 2014. Founded in 2004, Serverstack has since expanded to three datacenters in Amsterdam, New Jersey and San Jose. Serverstack offers a 100% uptime guarantee and has had a 100% uptime record over the past year.
Netcraft measures and makes available the response times of around forty 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.