Don’t use WPX or SiteGround.
While I would choose WPX between the two, there are better hosts out there for roughly the same price (like Rocket.net). I’d also argue SiteGround is one of the worst hosts you can use.
WPX was a top performer in Kevin Ohashi’s WordPress Hosting Benchmarks and use fast LiteSpeed servers. This means you can also use LiteSpeed Cache + QUIC.cloud, although they recommend W3TC + XDN. There are 3 major cons with WPX. First, they only have 3 data centers in Chicago, London, and Sydney. Second, their response to a worldwide outage was awful and resulted in them blaming a dead CEO even though it was their fault for not having a redundancy system. Third, they don’t list resource limits and it’s at their “discretion” to cancel your account if you use too many. $20.83/month for shared hosting is just a little too expensive if you ask me.
SiteGround has had so many complaints they had to hire “brand ambassadors” to censor Facebook Groups and ban people who speak out about them. They try to hide issues with their slow TTFB, CPU limits, outages, and DNS problems. They’ve managed to make nearly every aspect of their hosting worse: from raising prices to taking away free migrations and reducing their support. SiteGround has become very profit-driven and constantly blames issues on third-parties and suppliers. Plus, SiteGround Optimizer does a poor job of addressing core web vitals.
|Cache Plugin||LiteSpeed Cache or W3TC||SiteGround Optimizer|
|CDN||QUIC.cloud or XDN||SiteGround CDN|
|CPU Limits||At their discretion||Takes down website|
|Uptime||1 major outage||2 major outages|
|Dashboard||Custom||Custom (Site Tools)|
|Migrations||Free + speed optimization||$30/site|
|Pricing||High (but monthly option)||High renewals (about 3x)|
|Facebook Feedback||Good||Censors posts|
|Winner||Yes (But Better Options)||No|
1. Server – WPX (LiteSpeed) Is Faster Than SiteGround (Nginx)
In Kevin Ohashi’s WordPress Hosting Benchmarks, WPX had the fastest average load time in WebPageTest while SiteGround’s load time was at least double of WPX. This was for WordPress hosting plans under $25. Kevin’s tests are known to be one of the most reliable in the industry.
SiteGround has a history of TTFB problems especially after migrating to Google Cloud servers. They originally used one of the slowest N1 machine families but have since upgraded to a “balanced” N2 family. This is one reason they had the slowest TTFB in Backlinko’s TTFB test.
LiteSpeed has become one of the most popular types of servers in Facebook Groups.
2. Cache Plugin – LiteSpeed Cache On WPX vs. SiteGround Optimizer
Since WPX uses LiteSpeed, you can use LiteSpeed Cache which uses fast server-side caching (not sure why WPX recommends W3 Total Cache). Both LiteSpeed Cache and SiteGround Optimizer use server-side caching, but LiteSpeed Cache does a better job addressing core web vitals. It also has better reviews while SiteGround Optimizer has a history of compatibility issues the developers blame on third-parties if you check the support forums. WPX wins this category.
|SG Optimizer||W3 Total Cache||LiteSpeed Cache|
|Remove unused CSS||x||x||✓|
|Host third-party code locally||x||x||✓|
|Lazy render HTML elements||x||x||✓|
|Lazy load background images||x||In CSS Files||Helper class|
|Add missing image dimensions||x||x||✓|
|First time visit optimization||x||x||Guest Mode|
|Advanced cache control||x||x||✓|
|ESI (edge side includes)||x||x||✓|
|Limit post revisions||Delete all||x||Keep some|
|CDN PoPs||176||N/A||70 (standard plan)|
|Image optimization||Kind of||N/A||✓|
3. CDN – XDN (Or QUC.cloud) vs. SiteGround CDN
On WPX, I recommend using QUIC.cloud CDN (the paid standard plan) which is built for LiteSpeed and has 55 more PoPs than WPX’s XDN with HTML caching. It’s also needed for image/page optimizations in LSC with DDoS protection. For a free CDN, XDN should work fine.
SiteGround’s CDN only has 14 PoPs, 10GB bandwidth, and you have to use their DNS to use it (which was previously blocked by Google). You also have to use the paid version for dynamic caching and it lacks several image optimization features. You’re best off using Cloudflare + APO.
TLDR: XDN is better because it has more PoPs and is free. SiteGround’s CDN is better because the paid version uses dynamic caching. Neither of these compare to Cloudflare or QUIC.cloud.
4. CPU Limits – The Biggest Con Of Both
SiteGround’s CPU limits are notorious for making you upgrade plans.
Support usually tells you to keep upgrading and add memory, but they will rarely (if ever) help you fix this. However, the “problem” is SiteGround’s own fault (likely for having idle PHP workers). If you go to SiteGround’s features page and hover over the “server” tab, you can see their CPU limits. But even on expensive plans, you’re still very likely to get them. In my case, I had to pay SiteGround $120/month to get rid of them, and a whopping $180/mo to make my site decently fast. And believe me, my site was optimized from header to footer for lower CPU.
The problem with WPX is they don’t even list limits on CPU resources, inodes, email, and bandwidth. Instead, their TOS pretty much says it’s at their discretion whether they can cancel your account for using too much. WPX is the only host I’m aware of that doesn’t list these limits.
5. Uptime – Both Had Catastrophic Outages
Both SiteGround and WPX had major outages – neither took responsibility and instead, blamed someone else.
SiteGround’s DNS was blocked by Google for 4 days in 2011 which caused tons of customer sites to get deranked or completely deindexed in Google. They also had a major outage in 2022. In both cases, SiteGround either denied a problem ever existed or blamed it on Google/Amazon. They never told customers to move to another DNS (i.e. Cloudflare) and expected them to wait.
Status Update: We are glad to inform you that we have implemented a fix for the Google bot crawling issue experienced by some sites. Websites are already being crawled successfully. Please allow a few hours for the DNS changes to take effect. Thank you for your patience!
— SiteGround (@SiteGround) November 12, 2021
The lack of responsibility you are taking here is incredible. If this was simply Google’s fault, surely other hosts would be facing issues? Clearly something has changed on your set-up that has caused an issue. Are you aware just how damaging this is to many of your customers?
— Kim Snaith (@ichangedmyname) November 10, 2021
We are happy to announce that the incident with the cooling system and the failed storage at the Google Cloud data center in London has been resolved. Google engineers have managed to repair the storage and our servers are back online.
— SiteGround (@SiteGround) July 20, 2022
If you move to your Google Search Console > SETTINGS > CRAWL STATS you will, if unlucky like me, see something like this :-( pic.twitter.com/ocBEkWKsaw
— Tristan Haskins (@trishaskins) November 12, 2021
WPX’s outage was equally bad and you can read the Facebook conversation here. Although the outage only lasted about 5 hours, WPX’s own site went down, and blamed it on their partner (Steadfast) whose CEO died just months earlier. However, Steadfast’s other partners did not see an outage because they had a redundancy system in place. When asked about this, WPX’s CEO (Terry) claimed it was “extremely expensive and would 2x-5x the price of our hosting services.”
I couldn’t agree more with this response:
6. Data Centers – WPX Only Has 3 vs. SiteGround’s 7
A big con of WPX is they only have 3 data centers.
Using a data center close to your visitors has a large impact on TTFB which can be seen in tools such as KeyCDN’s Performance Test. SiteGround has 7 data centers, so there is more availability.
|WPX Data Centers||SiteGround Data Centers|
|Chicago, IL (USA)||Council Bluff, Iowa (US)|
|London (ENG)||Madrid (ESP)|
|Sydney (ASTL)||London (UK)|
|View WPX’s Data Centers||View SiteGround’s Data Centers|
7. WPX Dashboard vs. SiteGround Site Tools
Both WPX and SiteGround use a custom dashboard.
Both are easy to use but can have bugs. Whether it’s taking a staging site live or something usually simple, custom dashboards are usually not as reliable as something like cPanel/Plesk. One thing to note about WPX is that staging sites take up a “website slot” in your hosting plan.
SiteGround seemed to be built in a rush after cPanel raised their prices. SiteGround wanted to increase their bottom line by not paying for cPanel, so they created Site Tools. There have been many reports of bugs, but they seem to have most of them fixed now. Site Tools is hit or miss on whether you like it, but I can say many people preferred SiteGround’s old cPanel over Site Tools.
8. Migrations – WPX Has Free Migrations + Speed Optimization
SiteGround used to offer free migrations but now it’s $30/site.
WPX does free migrations with free site speed optimization where they optimize your site for core web vitals. I’ve never used this but I wouldn’t expect a miracle since core web vitals can be a lot of work. A couple hours usually won’t mean you’ll pass. But hey, it’s a little bonus to WPX.
9. Pricing – Both Are Overpriced Shared Hosting
Your “final price” completely depends on your hosting plan, whether you’re paying for a premium cache plugin/CDN, and whether WPX’s limits on email hosting are enough for you.
But when you look at WPX’s prices and SiteGround renewal prices (which are about 3x their intros which you only get for 1 year), both of these are way too expensive for shared hosting.
|Business||Up to 5||$24.99/mo||$20.83/mo|
|Professional||Up to 15||$49.99/mo||$41.58/mo|
|Elite||Up to 35||$99.00/mo||$83.25/mo|
|SiteGround Plan||Websites||Intro Price||Renewal Price|
10. Email – WPX Isn’t Suitable For Small Businesses
While neither host clearly lists their email hosting limits, there’s been several complaints that WPX doesn’t have good email hosting with low resource limits. This should be fine if you’re 1 person and don’t send a lot of emails. Otherwise, you’ll need something like Google Workspace.
11. Support – WPX Is Excellent (SiteGround Has Declined)
Here’s why SiteGround support has gotten worse:
- They buried the support button.
- Phone numbers, etc are buried too.
- They push upgrades while referencing CPU limits.
- They moved priority support from GrowBig to GoGeek.
- The added a large “scope of support” disclaimer limits what they do.
- Even if something is SiteGround’s fault (i.e. CPU limits), they may not help.
WPX’s support is significantly better. Live chat is at the bottom right of the screen or you can open a ticket. Live chat usually responds in 30s or less and they don’t push upgrades or make a mess like SiteGround. While support is usually something you have to experience yourself, I can tell SiteGround’s support is nowhere close to what it used to be. WPX is significantly better now.
12. Ethics – SiteGround’s Shady Business Practices
I will never support this company again because:
- Their community manager is an admin for the WP Speed Up Facebook Group.
- SiteGround’s brand ambassadors are admins for several major WordPress FB Groups.
- They use this to censor people who speak about them, ban people, and promote SG.
- They don’t take responsibility during outages or when SiteGround Optimizer has issues.
- They threaten to sue people who write bad reviews (I also got a cease and desist letter).
Any company who behaves like this is immediately thrown out of my recommendations.
13. TrustPilot Rating – Both WPX And SiteGround Are 4.7+
As of writing this, WPX has a 4.9/5 star rating while SiteGround’s dropped to 4.6/5.
14. Facebook Feedback – What People Say About WPX vs SiteGround
I suggest joining the WP Speed Matters Facebook Group to get unbiased feedback since other groups (WordPress Hosting/WordPress Speed Up) are controlled by people paid by SiteGround.
15. Winner – WPX (But Rocket.net Is Better)
WPX is OK, but you’re better off at Rocket.net if you’re paying $25/mo.
|SiteGround||WPX||Cloudways Vultr HF||Rocket.net|
|Hosting type||Shared||Shared||Cloud||Private cloud|
|CPU cores||Not listed||Not listed||1||32|
|RAM (GB)||Not listed||Not listed||1||128|
|Object cache||Memcached||x||Redis (Pro)||Redis|
|CDN||SiteGround CDN||QUIC.cloud||Cloudflare Enterprise ($5/mo)||Cloudflare Enterprise|
|Full page caching||✓||✓||x||✓|
|Argo smart routing||x||x||✓||✓|
|CPU limits||Very common||At their discretion||Average||None|
|Cache plugin||SG Optimizer||LSC or W3TC||Breeze||x|
|Email hosting||✓||Very limited||x||x|
|Major incidents||Google blocked DNS for 4 days||Worldwide outage||None||None|
|Free migration||$30/site||5-35 sites free||1 free||Unlimited free|
|Price||$3-8/mo (1 year) then $15-40/mo||$20.83 (yearly)||$13/mo + $5/mo for CF Enterprise||$25/mo (yearly)|
They will blow both WPX and SiteGround out of the water with an average global TTFB of <100ms. This is due to their free Cloudflare Enterprise + full page caching, 32 cores + 128GB RAM, NVMe SSDs, Redis, and they were a top performer in Kevin Ohashi’s tests. They also have up to 25x more monthly visits than Kinsta and don’t limit PHP workers since only about 10% of traffic hits your origin. Feel free to check their TrustPilot reviews, my review, or reach out to Ben.