Brace yourselves because we’re going for a ride for Bluehost vs Hostinger. I’ll take a look at the performance and the different technologies both Bluehost and Hostinger use, I’ll also take a look at the different pricing models, the support, extra features and etc to determine which provider works best for what type of website and what type of user.
Let’s get into the comparison of Bluehost vs Hostinger web shared hosting providers.
Bluehost vs Hostinger : Pricing
Let’s start from the pricing, Hostinger has its cheapest single shared hosting plan for $1.39 a month a 4 years plan is a single payment of and $66.72. While Bluehost’s cheapest plan comes in at around $2.95 a month or a maximum of 3 years will set you back around $106.
|Processor Power||1 core||1 core|
|Websites||1 website||1 website|
|Storage SSD||30 GB||50 GB|
|Free Domain||–||Free Domain|
|Get Hostinger||Get Bluehost|
On average Bluehost tends to be around 50% to 55% more expensive at every tier. They’re an older company, they do a lot of marketing so they have a little bit of a premium on the top of the regular price.
One feature that Bluehost has over Hostinger is that you do get a free domain name with their cheapest plan. Hostinger only offers a free domain name if you buy the more expensive plans, but you can buy a domain name with Hostinger separately and it’s still gonna be more than twice as cheap compared to Bluehost.
It’s just a small little inconvenience. And here’s where these 2 web hosting providers really start going their separate ways.
Hostinger, while being the cheaper option is actually extremely performance focused. They use Litespeed servers, take advantage of PHP 8 and HTTP/2 (HTTP/3), have part of their infrastructure on the Google Cloud Platform and use SSD storage over HDD.In simple terms, it’s some good stuff.
On the other hand, Bluehost is a more feature focused hosting provider, the last performance update that Bluehost had was back in 2017. So, they’re running on a bit of a legacy tech at this point.
Bluehost vs Hostinger : Performance
To see how much of a difference in terms of performance there is between these 2 providers I’ve created completely new empty WordPress websites and since Hostinger comes with a caching plugin already pre-installed I’ve also installed the third-party free caching plugin on Bluehost as well.
Just to make it more fair fight. By the way, both Bluehost and Hostinger have automatic WordPress installers available and made it extremely easy to create a new website. Hostinger with a $1 plan loaded the empty website in 1.2 seconds completely.
Anything below or close to 1 second is what you would expect from a fast hosting company. Bluehost though, yikes 2.9 seconds loading time more than double that of Hostinger’s.
The legacy tech of Bluehost is really starting to show here. But this isn’t like a definitive answer. Remember these websites are empty no users. In reality, you would have some users on your website. Let’s see how these two hosting providers handles a traffic
Traffic Handling test
So, I did what I usually do in these types of tests, I send some bot users to simulate real users to see if the performance takes a dip.
Hostinger wasn’t able to reliably handle 50 users at the same time without slowing down the whole website. The $1 per month plans are just not equipped for this kind of load.
Bluehost and their cheapest plan though slower in speed were able to handle the 50 users at the same time no problems.
What does this actually mean? Well, on average every single Hostinger plan will be around 2 times faster than the Bluehost counterpart. However, if you’re looking at strictly the cheapest plans Hostinger does limit the user count a bit to keep up its fast performance, bluehost doesn’t do this.
But if you’re getting a substantial amount of users you shouldn’t be sitting on the cheapest plan. So, in my opinion when it comes to cheap plans, speed matters more than how many users they can handle. Bluehost just kinda wins this one by default.
Bluehost vs Hostinger : Support
Hostinger doesn’t offer phone support of any kind. So, you’re only left with live chat and email. With Hostinger you get an extensive knowledge base of information to browse through if you like to fix problems yourself.
They have detailed articles with pictures and step-by-step instructions that they constantly update and you don’t even need to buy a plan to access all of this knowledge. You can just visit their website and it’s there.
But as i mentioned before Bluehost just straight up wins in this category because they’re offering free 24/7 live chat support, email, and phone support. As per the accuracy of the answers of the support agents I can’t really give much insight on that because it really depends on the person that’s supporting you.
In general, I had a better experience with Hostinger than Bluehost. But these were such edge cases that I don’t even think they’re relevant and it’s anecdotal evidence at best.
Bluehost vs Hostinger : Features
One of the most important, unique features of Hostinger is that they allow you to select the data center you want your files to be stored on. They have servers in all parts of the world, why is this important? Well, the less distance there is between your users and your website files the faster the information travels.
Bluehost only has data centers in the United States. One in the west coast and one in the east coast. However, Hostinger has data centers all across the world. In the United States, Asia and Europe. So, if you’re looking to create a website and you know that your readers will be european or asian, I would recommend choosing Hostinger because they have more data centers or have data centers in the locations that you need.
However, Bluehost has some advantages when it comes to managing your website. They offer automatic WordPress updates. However, this feature became obsolete in WordPress 5.5. Because, WordPress version 5.5 already automatically updates your plugins, themes and the core WordPress version if you wanted to.
But, you do get 1 more unique feature which is called website staging. This allows you to create a copy of your original website and test out the changes you make before you release them to the public. So, you reduce the risk of stuff going wrong.
By the way, remember when I said that Hostinger is more focused on speed and performance? Well Bluehost is more focused on helping you with the business side of things by offering consultations and tools to better manage your business.
In short, Hostinger features are better tailored to host international websites with a big emphasis on speed and performance while Bluehost will help you grow in the US market and build your business.
With all of that taken into account, who should choose Hostinger and who should choose Bluehost?
I think that Hostinger is best for people that want an extremely low price and good performance. But, you will be left in charge of managing your website and your business without much external help.
Bluehost is for people that are new to starting a business and want some help with their digital strategy. Yeah, the performance isn’t all that great but when you’re just starting a business, customer acquisition is much more important than top of the line performance.
Because you do need visitors in the first place to utilize your fast website. If you already made a choice you can get the biggest possible discounts that are available online by using the discount links here.