Bluehost Review 2026

We have been testing and monitoring Bluehost since 2021 with over 516,000 tests conducted on 22 US locations in our 2025 Q4. The host recorded an average TTFB of 520 ms and an uptime of 99.95%. Bluehost ranked 14 out of 34 in our 2026 WordPress hosting rankings scoring 6.90 out of 10. 

The host recorded 170 ms with 9% error rate in the Load Test scoring 6 out of 10, and an average of 344 ms in the Global TTFB, scoring 9 out of 10. Bluehost scored 9.6 out of 10 in the WPBench and scored 3.5 out 5 for its Static CDN. 

Bluehost starts for an intro price as low as $3.99 per month and renews at $9.99 per month. Bear in mind that the host doesn’t offer free email hosting, and doesn’t even offer daily backups. The plan only comes with weekly backup.

Metric	Bluehost Result	Score
Overall Rank	#14 of 34	6.90/10
TTFB (US, Q4 2025)	520ms	6/10
Uptime (Q4 2025)	99.95%	7.5/10
Load Test	170ms @ 9% error rate	6/10
Global TTFB (avg)	344ms	9/10
Server Hardware (WPBench)	9.6/10	9.6/10
CDN Type	Static CDN	3.5/5
Email Hosting	Addon (not included)	1.5/3
Backups	Weekly only	1/2
Intro Price	$3.99/mo	Value: 8/10
Renewal Price	$9.99/mo	—

TTFB Response Time

In our 2025 Q4 TTFB Test, Bluehost recorded an average of 520 ms scoring 6 out of 10 on our TTFB scale of 500 to 550 ms. 520 ms means the server takes half a second to respond. Pressable is the top performer in this performance metric with an average response time of 341 ms while GoDaddy is the worst performer with an average response time of 751 ms. Hence, Bluehost is 179 ms slower than Pressable, the top performer, and 231 ms faster than GoDaddy, the worst performer.

Bluehost recorded a TTFB of 532 ms in 2025 while the host recorded a TTFB of 408 ms in 2023, . This means the TTFB got worse by 124 ms and sites will take more time to load. Even though things seem to be getting a little better this year with a TTFB of 525 ms, you need to closely monitor the TTFB performance before going ahead with buying the plan. After all, you don’t want to lose your visitors because of slow page loading. 

Year	Tests Performed	Avg TTFB	Min TTFB	Max TTFB	Trend
2021	94,752	440ms	329ms	733ms	Baseline
2022	105,120	463ms	330ms	1,083ms	↑ +23ms
2023	105,120	408ms	323ms	769ms	↓ -55ms (best year)
2024	105,408	471ms	353ms	663ms	↑ +63ms
2025	104,832	532ms	396ms	855ms	↑ +61ms (worst year)
2026 (Jan, 18 days)	5,184	525ms	446ms	744ms	Stable

Uptime

Bluehost recorded an uptime of 99.95% in 2025 Q4, scoring 7.5 out of 10 in our uptime test. It means 13 minutes of downtime per month approximately, which is roughly 2.5 hours per year. For most sites, it’s a reasonably good uptime. Only four of the 34 web hosting providers that we track could achieve an uptime of 100% in 2025 Q4, which includes WordPress.com, Pressable and WP Engine.

Bluehost had the worst uptime in 2022 with 1,806 minutes of downtime, which is over 30 hours in a single year. Besides, it experienced the worst day with an uptime of 35.01%, which means our site was down for 65% of that day. However, we have seen improvements since  2023. Bluehost has been able to bring down its Outages to 14 and total downtime to 134 minutes in 2025 Q4. Things look more promising in 2026 so far with the host recording an uptime of 100% with zero outages.

Year	Tests	Avg Uptime	Total Downtime	Outages	Worst Day
2021	94,752	99.98%	81 min	20	98.19%
2022	105,120	99.66%	1,806 min (30+ hrs)	38	35.01%
2023	105,120	99.95%	268 min	30	95.83%
2024	105,408	99.97%	141 min	12	97.01%
2025	104,832	99.97%	134 min	14	97.36%
2026 (Jan)	5,184	100.00%	0 min	0	100.00%

Load Handling

Bluehost recorded an average response time of 170 ms with an error rate of 9% under a load of 100 visitors in 60 seconds. The host scored 6 out of 10 in the Load Test. The 9% error rate means 9 out of every 100 visitors received an error during the traffic spike and were not able to access the page they tried to access.

A 9% error rate is a failure rate while the test itself wasn’t a failed one since it was above the 50% threshold. However, we can’t recommend Bluehost with a 9% error rate in load handling for sites that may experience traffic spikes.

There are hosts that succeeded in achieving 0% error rate in Load Test and they are Pressable (12ms), WordPress.com (16ms), WP Engine (27ms), GreenGeeks (26ms), and HostArmada (32ms). There are also hosts that exceeded the 50% error rate like WPX Hosting (51.63%), NameHero (56%), EasyWP (56.8%), Ionos (65.4%), GoDaddy (68.8%), and Rocket.net (100%).

Server Hardware Test

Bluehost recorded a WPBench score of 9.6 out of 10, and this is Bluehost’s strongest metric. The host ranks number one with HostGator in terms of  WPBench among 34 providers. Other providers that scored well in the WPBench test are ScalaHosting with 8.8, Kinsta with 8.8, SiteGround with 8.4, and Hostinger with 7.4.

The WPBench test tests the host’s non-cached server resources such as CPU, RAM, and disk I/O with 21 individual sub tests across 5 categories, independent of web server software such as LiteSpeed or Apache or Nginx. A score of 9.6 out of 10 means Bluehost has excellent server hardware, which is advantageous for plugin heavy sites or WooCommerce stores or sites with complex database queries. The fact that Bluehost still has lower TTFB of 520 ms is because of lack of aggressive caching in the Starter plan. 

Global TTFB

In the Global TTFB test, Bluehost recorded a Global TTFB Average of 344 ms, scoring 9 out of 10, which is Elite-tier. The TTFB across America is 248 ms and across Europe and Asia Pacific is 274 ms and 495 ms respectively. This is another Bluehost strong performance metrics.

This is beneficial for sites that have audiences spread across the globe. Bluehost’s TTFB across Europe is exceptionally good with 274 ms and actually better than the TTFB across US which is 520 ms. Now, this is possible because of its data centers in the UK and Germany in conjunction with its static CDN to effectively route the European traffic. Hence, European audiences will experience faster load times than American audiences.

However, Bluehost uses a Static CDN and not edge caching. A static CDN delivers static assets instead of caching full page HTML at the edge. Even though a static CDN helps sites achieve strong global TTFB, it’s not as effective as an edge CDN, which delivers dynamic content. Hosts like edge CDNs have better global TTFBs than Bluehost like WP Engine with 169 ms, or GoDaddy Managed WP with 139 ms. 

Bluehost vs Competitors

Metric	Bluehost	Hostinger (Premium)	SiteGround	HostGator
Rank (of 34)	#14	#28	#22	#16
Score	6.90/10	6.12/10	6.50/10	6.85/10
TTFB Q4 2025	520ms	472ms	632ms	523ms
Uptime Q4 2025	99.95%	99.98%	99.97%	99.97%
Load Test (ms)	170ms	245ms	170ms	152ms
Load Test Error Rate	9.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.70%
Global TTFB avg	344ms	495ms	833ms	904ms
WPBench	9.6/10	7.4/10	8.4/10	9.6/10
CDN Type	Static	None	Addon	Static
Email Hosting	Addon	Addon	Included	Addon
Backups	Weekly	Weekly	Daily	Daily
Intro Price	$3.99/mo	$2.99/mo	$3.99/mo	$3.75/mo
Renewal Price	$9.99/mo	Writer verify	Writer verify	Writer verify

Bluehost vs Hostinger: Bluehost Wins on Global TTFB

Hostinger is much more affordable than Bluehost with the intro price priced at $1 per month. Bluehost beat Hostinger on global TTFB with 344 ms vs 495 ms while Hostinger won on US TTFB with 472 ms vs 520 ms. Besides, Hostinger has zero error rate in Load Test, while Bluehost recorded 9% error rate. Users looking for strong global performance should go with Bluehost since it has better global TTFB. However, users with a target audience in the US alone and looking for a budget host should go with Hostinger. 

Bluehost vs SiteGround: Bluehost Wins in Almost All Metrics

Both Bluehost and SiteGround offer the same intro price but there is a big difference in terms of performance. Bluehost beats SiteGound on US TTFB with 520 ms vs 632 ms as well as on global TTFB with 344 ms vs 833 ms. Bluehost is better than SiteGound in almost all metrics except for daily backups. 

Bluehost vs HostGator: Bluehost Wins on Global TTFB

Both Bluehost and HostGator have identical WPBench scores with 9.6 out of 10. Both Bluehost and HostGator have nearly identical US TTFB with 520 ms vs 523 ms. However, the real difference is in terms of global TTFB. While Bluehost recorded a global TTFB of 344 ms, HostGator recorded a global TTFB of 904 ms. Hence, you must choose Bluehost over HostGator if you have a global audience. Users with the US only audience can go with HostGator as it will cost slightly less than Bluehost with $3.72 vs $3.99.

Pricing & Plans

Bluehost’s Starter plan starts for a promotional price of $3.99 per month. However, the host requires users to choose the plan for 36 months with upfront payment to avail of the offer. That will cost users $143.64 ($3.99 x 36). The same plan renews at $99.99 per month, which is a 150% increase from the intro price. Renewing the plan costs $119.88 per year ($9.99 x 12).

Bluehost’s Starter comes with 10 GB NVMe Storage, allowing you to host up to 10 websites and suitable for 40k visits per month. The host offers Free CDN, Free Site Migration Tool, and Free SSL-Let’s Encrypt. However, bear in mind that the free domain it offers will remain free only till the first year. 

Bluehost also comes with good security comprising Free Malware Scanning, and DDoS Protection. Even though Bluehost offers free backups, it’s only limited to weekly backup and doesn’t offer daily backups.

Who Should Use Bluehost?

US based blogs with less than 50,000 monthly visitors can choose Bluehost as the TTFB of 520 ms is sufficient for low traffic sites. Besides, the promotional price of $3.99 per is really affordable for anyone just starting with a US based blog. Besides, sites that heavily depend on European audiences can benefit a lot from Bluehost since the host recorded a global TTFB of 274 ms across Europe. The TTFB at Frankfurt is 52 ms and that at London is 53 ms, which makes page loading for the European audience even faster than the American audience.

Bluehost has the best WPBench score with 9.6 out of 10, which reflects its strong raw server hardware capability. This makes the host ideal for sites that rely on complex plugin environments and database heavy operations. In fact, Bluehost will handle such sites better than its competitors at a similar price point. 

First time users can benefit a lot from Bluehost since the host comes with built-in WordPress onboarding tools even on the Starter plan. Bluehost also offers excellent server hardware at such a low price point. Besides, the intro price is pretty affordable with $3.99 per month. However, bear in mind the renewal price is $9.99 per month and if you are okay with this, only then go ahead with Bluehost. 

Who Should NOT Use Bluehost?

Our load testing revealed Bluehost’s 9% error rate in load handling, which isn’t a good thing for any site with traffic spikes. For ecommerce stores, it can impact a lot in terms of sales when every 9 out of 100 visitors receive an error instead of a quick page loading. Hence, sites like ecommerce stores and viral traffic sites should avoid Bluehost and consider hosts with zero error rate load handling like WP Engine (27 ms / 0% errors) or GreenGeeks (26 ms / 0 error rate). 

In our global TTFB test, we found Bluehost’s average response time for Asia Pacific as 495 ms and the TTFB across some specific Asian locations was just too high, like 753ms in Singapore and 600ms in Sydney. Hence, if more than 20% of your traffic is in APAC, you must avoid Bluehost and look for a host with a regional data center or edge CDN.

Bluehost doesn’t offer daily backups and instead offers weekly backups alone. If you badly need daily backups for your site, you can look for hosts that offer daily backups. Even though there are many free WordPress plugins that can help you with it. However, if you are completely new to hosting, choosing the best web hosting provider like GreenGeeks or Hostinger Business that come with daily backups would be much more convenient for you.

Budget conscious users need to bear in mind that Bluehost’s renewal price is 150% more than the intro price with $9.99 per month. If you think it’s just too pricey for you, you can avoid Bluehost and look for a host with a comparatively lower renewal price. 

Our Verdict

Bluehost scored an overall score of 6.9 out of 10, ranking 14 out of 34 providers that we tested in our 2026 rankings. We recommend Bluehost for sites with target traffic across the US and Europe with 520 ms and 274 ms respectively. Besides, Bluehost is ideal for anyone starting a small US based blog under a tight budget as the Starter plan costs just $3.99 per month which is pretty affordable. 

We do not recommend Bluehost for sites that have audiences across Asia Pacific since Bluehost recorded an average global TTFB of 495 ms. Furthermore, the TTFB is 753ms in Singapore and 600ms in Sydney. Sites that expect traffic spikes should avoid Bluehost since the host recorded 9% errors in load handling. 

Even though Bluehost has strong server hardware and good global TTFB, the host suffers from some limitations such as poor US TTFB of 520 ms,  a 9% load test error rate, and weekly only backups. Bluehost should be okay for a US based blogger who is under a tight budget but it’s not at all ideal for ecommerce sites that experience high traffic. While Bluehost’s intro price looks amazingly affordable at $3.99 per month, bear in mind the renewal is 150% higher than the intro price with $9.99 per month.

Methodology 

All hosting accounts we use to conduct our tests are bought with our own funds (with invoices available for verification) and are not promotional or free press accounts. The tools we use for our methodolody testing comprise Pingdom for TTFB and Uptime, Loader.io for Load Testing, WPBenchmark for server hardware, and SpeedVitals for global TTFB. Every year, we conduct 525,600 tests for each provider. Besides, we consistently monitor each provider every 60 seconds 24/7. 

We test our hosting providers in 40 cities across America, Europe and Asia Pacific. Our data period is the 2025 fourth quarter, which is from October 1 to December 31. Our Bluehost data is available from 2021 to 2025 Q4. We test and keep a constant monitoring of 34 hosting providers. We test them using the standard test environment comprising a WordPress site with the Twenty Twenty four theme and identical plugins.