FlyingProxy is the new cloud-based speed optimization service for WordPress sites. The plugin is developed by Gijo Varghese, one of the prominent names in the WordPress industry.
After using their service for a week, I reviewed FlyingProxy with its pros and cons.
To get started, I signed up for a trial account and deployed a site with
- Astra theme
The signup process is simple, and it takes less than five minutes to configure our site. I enabled all the recommended settings in the dashboard.
Before going to the test results, I can explain a bit about FlyingProxy. The service is a speed optimization service focused on caching and optimization through CDN. It uses Cloudflare Enterprise CDN to deliver your site contents through its 200+ data center locations across the globe.
The list of all FlyingProxy features are
- Powered by Cloudflare Enterprise
- DDOS protection
- Cloud optimization
- Optimized for Core Web Vitals metrics like LCP, CLS etc.
- Image compression & WebP delivery.
- Advanced security.
Along with FlyingProxy demo site, I also deployed another site that uses Cloudflare's free plan to clearly understand the difference between the FlyingProxy site and the generic site. The site is configured to cache everything similar to how FlyingProxy caches the HTML pages.
Without any delay, let’s look into the test results.
FlyingProxy Performance test:
Test 1 – TTFB test
I’m starting with a traditional TTFB test to measure the TTFB across all global locations. The FlyingProxy’s site TTFB results are similar to the site that uses a free Cloudflare plan. The only difference is that FlyingProxy delivers the content from the closest data center while the free Cloudflare site provides the content from a different server location.
Along with the above two sites, I also deployed a site in Rocket Hosting that uses Cloudflare Enterprise, and their results are impressive.
Test 2 – Core Web Vitals Test
I use GTMetrix to measure the Core Web Vitals performance of the sites. The Largest Contentful Paint (LCP) of the FlyingProxy site is higher at 1.5 seconds, while the rest of the sites loaded below 1 second.
|FlyingProxy Site||1.5 s||62 ms||0.05|
|Generic site||890 ms||76 ms||0.05|
|Rocket Hosting||801 ms||0 ms||0.06|
Rocket Hosting site:
Test 3 – Full Load test
In this test, the site's full load time is calculated from five different global locations. Check the video and Images for load results.
- FlyingProxy – 3.38s
- Generic site – 3.63s
- Rocket – 2.05s
Few of them asked to compare the FlyingProxy with Rocket Hosting as they too use Cloudflare Enterprise services. I deployed a demo site on Rocket, and below are the test results.
By looking into test results, one can understand FlyingProxy doesn’t magically increase the website speed.
The results are almost identical between FlyingProxy and the generic site. The only difference is that FlyingProxy uses Cloudflare Enterprise. You’ll get a lot of premium features like image optimization, Argo routing, and Security features that are not available on the generic site that uses a free Cloudflare account.
There are some areas where they need improvement. The TTFB for the first visit is high as the cache MISS happens, which results in high full load time. Even after running the test multiple time, the cache MISS is happening at 2-3 locations.
Takeaway 1: If you have a managed WP Hosting like Cloudways, then a traditional setup itself is enough to attain good speed. The setup includes
- premium caching plugins like WP Rocket, FlyingPress, etc., and
- image optimization plugins like SmushIt or Imagify
- speed optimization plugins like PerfMatters or WP Asset Clean Up.
Alternatively, Cloudways also offers Cloudflare Enterprise integration for $4.99/site.
Takeaway 2: If you’re on VPS or a Dedicated server, then FlyingProxy is a cost-saving option as you won’t be able to get a Cloudflare Enterprise for $10/site anywhere else (Cloudways offers CF Enterprise for $4.99/mo, but your sites need to be hosted with them). However, do your own testing before moving to FlyingProxy.
Since FlyingProxy is in beta, its performance might not be the best. Once it's out of beta, I’ll test it again and update my review.