Home › Methodology

How we score hosting

Every provider is scored across 8 weighted factors using public, verifiable data, true long-term cost, and practical project fit. No paid placement. No first-person lab tests.

Scoring rubric v1.0 locked 12 June 2026. Part of BestMatch Group.

Editorial, not lab-tested. We don't personally run speed tests or benchmark servers. Scores are editorial judgements based on published specifications, SLA documentation, independent benchmark reports, and provider transparency. They're defensible, not absolute.

Decision engine principles

Weighted criteria

Performance matters more than developer tooling for most users, so the score reflects real decision weight.

Real cost

Intro price, renewal price, included features, and three-year cost all influence value.

Fit over hype

The best host for a beginner is not automatically the best host for an agency or developer.

Commercial firewall

Affiliate status is separate from scoring. Paid placement is not accepted.

The 8 factors and their weights

FactorWeightWhat it measures
Performance25%TTFB, Core Web Vitals, server response, CDN availability
Uptime / Reliability20%SLA guarantees, historical uptime, redundancy
Price / Value20%Entry price vs renewal price, included features
Support15%24/7 availability, channels, response-time reputation
Security10%Free SSL, backups, DDoS protection, WAF, malware removal
Ease of Use5%Control panel, one-click installs, onboarding
Scalability3%Upgrade paths, resource limits, vertical scaling
Developer Features2%SSH, staging environments, git, WP-CLI, API

The weighted score is simply each factor's 0–100 score multiplied by its weight, summed, and rounded. A provider scoring 90 on Performance contributes 22.5 points (90 × 0.25) to its total.

The True 3-Year Cost

The single most important number we show that almost nobody else does. Introductory prices are discounts to win new customers — the renewal rate is what you actually pay long-term, often 3–8× higher.

True 3-Year Cost = (entry price × 12) + (renewal price × 24). One year at the intro rate, then two years at the renewal rate. It exposes the renewal-price trap at a glance.

Example: Hostinger looks cheaper than SiteGround at the headline ($2.99 vs $3.99). But over three years: Hostinger $276 vs SiteGround $408 — the gap is real, and now you can see it before you buy.

How we handle missing data

ScenarioHow we score it
No published SLAScore 70 (baseline), noted as "SLA not published"
No renewal price shownValue scored lower, noted as "renewal price unclear"
No staging / dev-tool infoDeveloper Features scored lower
Conflicting dataMost recent or most authoritative source wins

Sources

Every score links to its source from the comparison views. We draw on provider documentation, published SLA terms, independent benchmark reports, and public pricing pages. Data was last verified 12 June 2026.

Where this fits in BestMatch Group

Best Hosting Match uses the same operating philosophy as Best VPN Match and Best VPS Match: transparent weighted metrics, real costs, practical diagnostics, and no paid ranking control. Each vertical has its own weights because each decision has different risks.

What we will never do