Difference Between Bluehost and SiteGround (With Table)

Choosing a host for your site is important as it plays a huge role in how smoothly your website loads and runs, especially when it gets viral. With that, the host should be that much of capable to load not one, but at least 500 visitors at a time because if your site is down, you’re losing money.

So, If one is in search of a web host at a nominal rate, Bluehost and SiteGround are the best for it and with this, both are fierce competitors in the industry of web hosting.

Saying this, both the companies offer quite similar services but there’s a thin line from where they are different from each other.

Bluehost vs SiteGround

The difference between Bluehost and SiteGround is that Bluehost has a limited entry plan with 5 email accounts and provide storage of 100 MB. Whereas, SiteGround provides unlimited irrespective of any plan but has limited storage.

Comparison Table Between Bluehost and SiteGround

Parámetros de comparaciónBluehostSiteGround
Usage LimitIt has high storage space, following which it provides unlimited storage.It has limited storage capacity, following which it only provides 10 GB to fit in the requirements.
ActuaciónIt fails to match the loading speed of a website delivered by its rival.Its one of the key component is that it delivers speed that loads a website quickly.
PrecioIt is quite cheap as compared to SiteGround.It is expensive as compared to Bluehost.
CaracterísticaIts hosting features are quite fewer in comparison.It has a good strength of hosting feature.
ApoyoIt lags in terms of support as it works slow and is less resourceful.It provides 24/7 support via call, email and chat and is quite resourceful as well.
Tiempo de actividadOn average, it provides 99.97% uptimes.It provides an average of 99.99% uptimes.
Free Domain NameIt provides the user with the offer to have a free domain name.It does not provide its user with the offer.

¿Qué es Bluehost?

Bluehost, which is owned by Endurance International Group, is like just another web hosting company that provides selling and renting of servers to any business firm or who wants to own a website. It also provides a free version backup to its users and a full version backup service as per its plan.

It is currently listed among 20 largest web hosts, for hosting over 2 million domains. It serves hosting solutions like shared hosting, dedicated hosting, VPS hosting, WooCommerce, etc. Its servers are fuelled by HTTP/2, PHP 7 and NGINX+ caching.

In terms of ethics and responsibilities, Bluehost has prohibited any adult material to be shared its servers.

On top of everything, Bluehost is among the three websites that WordPress has itself endorsed to its users.

What is SiteGround?

SiteGround is another web hosting company that serves shared hosting, enterprise solutions, cloud hosting, etc.

Founded in 2004, the company also provides email hosting and domain registration. It now has six data centres in six countries – Germany, the United Kingdom, Australia, Singapore, the United States and the Netherlands.

Endorsed by WordPress, SiteGround runs WHM/cPanel, CentOS, MySQL, PHP and Apache on its servers.

It serves web hosting for WooCommerce, Joomla, WordPress, Drupal, PrestaShop and other websites. It also has a good reputation in the market of web hosting for its excellent uptime.

Main Differences Between Bluehost and SiteGround

  1. Bluehost serves its users with an unlimited storage capacity. On the other hand, SiteGround serves a limited storage capacity of only 10GB.
  2. In the area of performance, Bluehost fails to impress here as its loading speed is slow. Whereas, SiteGround excels in terms of its performance by providing high-speed loading.
  3. Price-wise, Bluehost is pocket-friendly. Whereas SiteGround is expensive in comparison.
  4. Bluehost has fewer hosting features. Whereas SiteGround provides a plethora of hosting features to its users.
  5. Bluehost lags in terms of providing support to its consumers as it works slow and is at the same less resourceful. On the other hand, SiteGround serves 24/7 support to its consumer via various media like chat, email or phone and is at the same time quite resourceful.
  6. On average, Bluehost’s uptimes generally stay on the bar of 99.97%. Whereas, SiteGround’s uptimes remain generally on the bar of 99.99%, standing as the No. 1 in the category.
  7. Adding starts to its offers, Bluehost provides its user to have a free domain name. On the other hand, SiteGround doesn’t provide its users with this offer.
  8. Bluehost has a limited entry-level plan which restricts to only five email accounts. SiteGround, on the other hand, provides an unlimited account in its basic-level plan.

Conclusión

After all the analysis between the two leading web hosting companies, it should be clear as of now that who’s winner, but there’s still a few things to look out before going to the direct conclusion.

As aforementioned, Bluehost has its pros like that it provides unlimited storage capacity, provides a free domain name and also has a cheap rate. So if one is looking for all these criteria can willfully go for the web hosting company.

Talking about SiteGround, it has a plethora of pros in its services. It provides a better web hosting feature, with excellent performance and uptime. And not only this, but it also serves its customers with 24/7 support with quick response.

But as budget always matters, SiteGround is comparatively expensive than Bluehost, though that doesn’t mean it is less than its rival in any other terms. So, if it’s charging extra, it worth it.

One can also segregate their choice by looking at their business’ strength, as in whether it is a large business or a small business. If its a small and does not have a scope to get many viewers at once that they can surely opt for Bluehost, but on the same line, if a business is huge and also can get its website flooded with viewers, so they can go ahead with SiteGround.

Referencias

  1. https://askanydifference.com/link/bluehost
  2. https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-1-4842-3846-2_4
x
2D vs 3D