SiteGround CDN Review: 2.0 Has Big Improvements, But It’s Still Inferior To Cloudflare APO With An Unreliable DNS

Siteground cdn review

Even after SiteGround’s CDN 2.0, is it better than Cloudflare APO? My opinion is no.

It has 109 less edge locations, no HTTP/3, barely optimizes images, and you still have to use SiteGround’s DNS to use it which has proven unreliable after Google blocked it for 4 days. This resulted in large ranking drops and customer websites getting completely deindexed in Google.

Why risk it?

SiteGround just wants you to pay them instead of Cloudflare (hence, they discontinued it). It’s the same reason you saw hosts building their own control panel after cPanel increased prices.

Do you really think SiteGround’s CDN is better than Cloudflare, a CDN developed in 2009 with 3,217 employees and 192 Tbps data transfer speeds? I’ll run some tests shortly, but I doubt it.

Siteground cdn slow
Once again, actual results fall short of SiteGround’s claims (source: SiteGround)


1. You Have To Use SiteGround’s Unreliable DNS

You have to use SiteGround’s DNS to use their CDN. Here are the issues:

  1. SiteGround’s DNS got blocked by Google.
  2. SiteGround originally said “there is no blocking on our end.”
  3. They eventually admitted the problem, but blamed Amazon/Google.
  4. They eventually “implemented a fix” but never advised people to move their DNS.
  5. Customers lost Google rankings and some sites got deindexed from Google completely.

The question is, why wouldn’t you just use Cloudflare’s free DNS? It performs great on But hey, if you want to trust SiteGround with your Google rankings, go for it.

Cloudflare dns


2. 176 PoPs

Cloudflare has 285 PoPs while SiteGround uses Google Cloud’s network with 176 PoPs.

Obviously the geographic distance from these edge locations and users plays a big role with metrics like latency and TTFB. While both have more PoPs than most CDNs, Cloudflare still wins.

Siteground cdn pops
SiteGround’s network page hasn’t been updated yet (see Google Cloud’s network locations)
Cloudflare network
Cloudflare’s network has 285 PoPs and a 192 Tbps


3. AnyCast Routing

SiteGround’s CDN 2.0 uses Anycast which routes traffic to the closest data center and is specifically good when dealing with high traffic volume, network congestion, and protecting against DDoS attacks. It provides higher availability if a node is attacked, overloaded, or fails.

Unicast vs. Anycast (source:


4. Lacks Image Optimizations

SiteGround Optimizer and SiteGround’s CDN do a poor job optimizing images.

One of the biggest disadvantages is they can’t resize images for mobile to improve mobile LCP. They don’t support AVIF, preloading LCP images, adding missing image dimensions to prevent layout shifts (CLS), and they can’t lazy load background images. This is why I recommend using Perfmatters on SiteGround, but resizing images for mobile is usually something your CDN does.

Cloudflare Mirage + Polish support many of these optimizations while others are usually done by your caching/optimization plugin. Bunny Optimizer also supports dynamic image resizing.

SiteGround Optimizer SiteGround CDN Optimole Cloudflare Mirage/Polish
WebP x
Mobile resizing x x
Network-based optimizations x x
AVIF conversion x x
AVIF support x x
Price Free $7.49/mo Free 5,000 visits/mo then $19.08/mo $20/mo with Cloudflare Pro (or included in several Cloudflare Enterprise integrations)



5. Lacks HTTP/3 And Other Features

Cloudflare has a plethora of settings/features not found in SiteGround’s CDN:

  • HTTP/3
  • Bot protection
  • Rate limiting
  • Page/firewall rules
  • Analytics
  • Signed Exchanges (SXGs)
  • Better image optimization
  • …among other features (especially on higher plans like Cloudflare Enterprise)

Siteground cdn free vs premium


6. Unlimited/Unmetered CDNs Still Have Limits

Just like “unlimited” hosting storage, unmetered bandwidth doesn’t mean unlimited.

SiteGround doesn’t list CDN bandwidth limits, so take this with a grain of salt. RocketCDN advertises unlimited bandwidth but isn’t, since your account will be canceled at some point.

Most CDNs are either usage-based (BunnyCDN +’s CDN) or have bandwidth limits (Cloudflare Enterprise on Cloudways + FlyingProxy). SiteGround needs to be more transparent.

Rocketcdn limited bandwidth


7. Test TTFB In 40 Global Locations

KeyCDN and SpeedVitals test TTFB in multiple global locations.

SpeedVitals recommends testing your site a few times to make sure resources are cached and served from the CDN’s closest data center. I typically use the results of the 3rd SpeedVitals test.

Omm ttfb speedvitals 1


8. SiteGround’s Products Have Compatibility Issues

Any time SiteGround launches a new product or revamps something, do yourself a favor and wait to use it. It’s usually full of issues which they usually deny, so I wouldn’t trust their opinion.

  • Their DNS was blocked by Google.
  • SG Optimizer plugin has ongoing compatibility issues.
  • Site Tools had a lot of bugs/missing features when first launched.
  • When migrating to Google Cloud, even Backlinko reported TTFB issues.
Siteground optimizer third party compatibility issue
SiteGround Optimizer has ongoing compatibility issues they blame on third-party plugins
Cloudflare apo siteground optimizer
They make false claims against Cloudflare APO
Siteground site tools
Many complaints about Site Tools have been removed since (SiteGround has ties to FB group admins)


9. Conclusion: Stick To Cloudflare APO Or FlyingProxy

Or if you’re open to a faster host, I use’s Cloudflare Enterprise.

SiteGround CDN (Paid Plan) Cloudflare + APO FlyingProxy Cloudflare Enterprise
PoPs 176 285 285 285
Tbps Not listed 192 192 192
Dynamic caching APO APO APO
HTTP/3 x
Image optimization Very limited Mirage + Polish Mirage + Polish Mirage + Polish
Smart routing Anycast Argo (paid feature) x
Load balancing Paid feature
DDoS protection
Bandwidth Unmetered Unlimited 100GB Unlimited (only hosting plan limits)
Price $7.49/mo $5/mo $10/mo Free with hosting

Rocket. Net cloudflare enterprise vs. Flyingproxy


You Might Also Like:


  1. Any updates on your experience from a year ago, if you don’t mind sharing? I have sites hosted with Siteground and have great real life visitor speeds but on Google Page Speed insights the site performance sucks. I am considering to using Cloudflare CDN + APO while leaving my sites on Siteground for hosting. But your experience of Siteground blocking Cloudflare does bot sound good. I only have 5 sites hosted on Siteground, I might even consider moving to another hosting provider if that problem is still there.

  2. Thanks to your article, I’m now seriously considering giving SiteGround CDN a try. Keep up the fantastic work, and I’ll be sure to check back for more of your expert insights in the future!

  3. I was the quote in the screenshot from Feb 2023 where I tested the siteground CDN enabled vs disabled.

    I really went down the rabbit hole with this. Very frustrating.

    To be fair, after that I verified with Siteground support that their CDN 2.0 was in fact NOT live yet for the site I was testing. So that was a test of their cdn 1.x. I think it went live for all users about a week later, and from what I understand, they used to have an additional DNS delay that was slowing every request down that they’ve corrected in 2.0 eliminating the extra internal DNS lookup, so that hypothetically should make the entire thing faster right there.

    That said, I just tested server response time again on the same site I tested in the comment, and am getting more like 275ms now with their CDN (2.0) enabled. Also, I’m not using their Premium CDN, just the free level. So, this seems like a big improvement, but still not the lightning fast sub <100ms speeds I've seen with other CDNs.

    I tested the site on Google Site Speed, and got a 100ms server response time, even better.

    For the past few months, I have been using Quic.Cloud with LiteSpeed Cache plugin and getting really great performance (WHEN it's all working), but Siteground blocks a bunch of their IPs periodically causing regional downtime, and unfortunately Quic.Cloud doesn't offer any tools to check which nodes are serving 520 errors (can't reach origin server) so there's no visibility into the issue on the Quic Cloud side, the main reason I'm going to have to leave their service it seems.

    I don't really want to use siteground's CDN, but since their bot-check and bot-blocking is just so intense, it seems like it blocks CDNs in general. Convenient for them that if you use their CDN, I suppose that doesn't happen. Sadly I guess I'd rather have a pretty-fast site with good uptime where that doesn't happen, than a really fast site that's just down for whole regions of the country when their system blocks an entire edge node.

    Basically if any CDN needs to cache a site, especially with a pre-heat feature for example, the sheer number of hits in a short amount of time may flag the IP as a bot on Siteground's side and start redirecting to the .well-know/recaptcha bot check page, or block it outright, either way defeating the point of using the CDN in the first place and actually causing more harm than good. Or if any hacker decides to run a DDoS or a brute force attack from any of the Quic Cloud IPs, then that region's IP will then get flagged and blocked for all of their customers, which seems like a scenario with no solution.

    I've had to have Siteground manually whitelist Quic Cloud IPs at least like 10 times, and that's always after it's been going on for some time. I have to manually get on Slack with Quic Cloud's support and ask them to check their node list for any given site and tell me which nodes can't reach the origin server, which also sucks on the Quic Cloud side. I use pingdom to monitor uptime but it doesn't seem to catch the issue for some reason, even though it's doing synthetic checks from lots of cities around the US, including ones where I know blocking is been happening actively.

    So, as a result, I'm not sure Siteground hosting will work with any CDN at all, to be honest. And, since I'm not ready to migrate all my sites entirely just yet (probably around 100 sites between mine and my clients), and open that whole can of worms, I am looking for the best option to use with Siteground hosting and for now it seems to be their own CDN.

    That sucks because their SG Optimizer plugin doesn't do nearly as good a job as compared to LiteSpeed Cache plugin or some other options out there, like NitroPack, PerfMatters, WP Rocket, etc.

    If I can get a Google Page Speed score in the mid 90s or higher with their CDN 2.0 I'll stick with their ecosystem (that's what I can get with LS Cache + Quic Cloud when it's not being blocked), but if it dips back into the 80s like it used to be I'm going to probably look for a new hosting company, specifically one that has LiteSpeed servers and works OK with Quic Cloud.

    • That’s gotta be the most detailed review I’ve seen on my blog. Really appreciate you taking the time to write that. And yeah, definitely a rabbit hole but hopefully it can help people who are using/exploring it. Thanks Sean.


Leave a Comment