In this comparison of Namecheap and Bluehost, I will examine each service provider in great detail. The cost, usability, performance, and safety of their products, as well as their customer service, will be the primary areas of emphasis. After all, these are the primary aspects of the service that you’re paying for when you purchase hosting.
It is not a simple effort to search for web hosting that is both reputable and economical. But deciding between Namecheap and Bluehost is an excellent place to start when making a choice.
Namecheap is consistently ranked as one of the most cost-effective hosting companies on the market. Its prices are so cheap that one almost wonders if they are trying to hide anything. Because of this, the service is renowned much more for being a domain registrar than as a dependable supplier.
Alternately, Bluehost is one of the leaders in this sector of the market. Despite having higher pricing, it is still within the range of what is considered to be reasonable. Prices that do not cause you to wonder whether or not you are receiving a kitty in a bag.
Regardless, each service provider has both positives and negatives to offer. Therefore, without further ado, let’s get right into it with a brief summary of the situation.
Namecheap vs Bluehost -- Overview
Namecheap and Bluehost both provide reasonable solutions for both beginners and expert users, with a variety of options to select from. While Namecheap, as the name implies, is less expensive than Bluehost, the latter is speedier and more trustworthy.
Here’s a short rundown of both service providers. You can go to a specific topic of interest or go directly to the bottom of the article for a summary of findings.
WINNER
Bluehost
Namecheap vs Bluehost Pricing Review
Namecheap is substantially less expensive than Bluehost, with shared hosting services beginning at $1.58/month. Namecheap’s most expensive package is $4.68 per month. Bluehost’s lowest shared hosting package, on the other hand, costs $2.95 per month. And its shared hosting options might cost up to $13.95 per month.
Other hosting alternatives include:
Regardless of the number of possibilities, shared hosting is the most common and my focus for this comparison.
What exactly is included in such shared hosting packages?
Both hosts have several characteristics. In their entry plans, Namecheap and Bluehost both include a free domain for a year as well as a free SSL certificate. While Bluehost offers greater SSD storage, Namecheap allows you to connect up to three websites.
- Namecheap Stellar ($1.58/month) supports up to three websites and comes with a 20GB SSD, unmetered bandwidth, 30 email accounts, and backups.
- Bluehost’s Basic ($2.95/month) plan allows for the connection of one website and offers a 50GB SSD, unlimited bandwidth, and five email addresses.
So, even simply examining at the lowest options, we can see that Namecheap provides a more comprehensive bundle. It is uncommon for a provider to enable more than one website on its entry levels. However, it provides much less storage than Bluehost.
So it all comes down to what you’re searching for. If you want to host many websites, Namecheap has you covered, but you will be constrained by a rather tiny SSD storage limit. Larger storage may be more appealing if you want to host a personal or small company website.
Regardless, the initial pricing are simply a one-time deal, as is customary in this market. Renewals always catch up with you, so here is how Namecheap and Bluehost would appear.
Namecheap is substantially less expensive than Bluehost. After all, the word “cheap” is in the provider’s name. The renewal rates significantly raise the total. But, unfortunately, that is unavoidable.
So far, I’ve evaluated two of the cheapest plans available, but that doesn’t imply they’re the best value. So, which ones should you think about? Here’s what I observed after thoroughly inspecting all designs.
Namecheap Pricing Review
Namecheap offers three shared hosting plans ranging from $1.58/month to $4.68/month with a two-year contract.
Namecheap, like other providers, indicates which plan is the most popular among subscribers. And I agree with this proposal. The Stellar Plus plan falls somewhere in the centre.
It provides infinite webpages and greater storage than Stellar. In terms of resources, Stellar Plus is extremely comparable to Stellar Business, but at half the price.
- When compared to Stellar, Stellar Plus at $2.68/mo has an infinite number of hosted websites and storage space. It also has guaranteed automated backups (Stellar allegedly offers them but does not guarantee them… Okay…).
One thing to note is that, although Stellar Plus offers unmetered SSD storage, Stellar Business only includes a 50GB SSD. You may already know this, but Stellar Plus will not feature more than a 50GB SSD. Isn’t that sneaky?
Our Recommendation
Bluehost pricing Review
Bluehost now offers four shared hosting plans ranging from $2.95/month to $13.95/month with a 36-month billing cycle.
Bluehost also contributes by suggesting the Choice Plus plan. Plus, in my opinion, provides far more value for the money.
- Plus, as compared to Basic, $5.45/month offers unlimited webpages and SSD storage.
Choice Plus also includes domain privacy and automatic backups. This, however, has a substantially higher renewal cost than Plus. That just does not make it worthwhile.
The same is true for Pro. Pro is just too expensive if you do not intend to run a high-traffic site that requires an extra degree of protection.
Our Recommendation
Bluehost’s greatest deal is hidden behind the Plus plan. You should choose the 36-month paying period to obtain the cheapest price. This brings the plan’s monthly cost to $5.45, or $178.20 in total. Renewal fees increase to $11.99 each month, or $431.64 in total.
Bluehost vs Namecheap Pricing Review -- Summary
When it comes to money-back policies, both Namecheap and Bluehost offer a 30-day money-back guarantee, which is fairly standard in the industry. Another thing that both of them do is that they do not refund everything. Bluehost, for example, will not refund a domain, and Namecheap will not refund your money for any service renewal.
Overall, Namecheap not only provides less expensive services, but its plans are more comprehensive. The prices are too good to be true, leaving me to wonder what’s missing. Bluehost’s prices aren’t too bad either, but when compared to Namecheap’s, they appear much more expensive than they are.
WINNER
Namecheap
Namecheap vs Bluehost -- Ease of Use
Both Bluehost and Namecheap provide user interfaces that are simple to use and functional. Bluehost, on the other hand, is marginally superior. It not only seamlessly integrates cPanel, but it also has a custom dashboard for beginners, as well as additional features to help you manage your website and business. At the same time, Namecheap uses cPanel as its primary management tool and includes a free logo maker.
So, if you’ve ever wondered, this is how it all looks.
Account management dashboard
Whether you log in to Namecheap or Bluehost, you will be greeted with equally clean and modern dashboards. But there are distinctions. While Bluehost’s dashboard is designed for account and website management, the Namecheap dashboard is designed for navigation and account/service management.
When you look at Namecheap’s dashboard, you notice that everything is in order. As it should be in any client area.
From here, you can manage all aspects of your hosting account and websites. More domains can be added, registrations can be renewed, and products can be added to your hosting service. This dashboard, on the other hand, is more for navigation. The cPanel includes all of the essential features such as file, email, and database management.
Bluehost’s dashboard, on the other hand, is far more functional. There is no clutter, and it includes a useful feature that beginners will appreciate.
Do you see the checkboxes? That seems like a to-do list for your website. If you’ve just begun dabbling with website hosting and creation, this is manna from heaven. Keep in mind that the list only applies if WordPress is installed. If you install a different CMS, you’ll have to make that list yourself.
Aside than that, this dashboard is completely functioning.
You may control not only your account and services, but also websites. It is possible to create a new website, connect a domain, access a mailbox, modify performance and security settings, and do pretty much anything else. This dashboard may be used to configure the entire site. cPanel is available under the “Advanced” menu, although you may not require it.
The conclusion is that both Namecheap and Bluehost offer user-friendly dashboards. Bluehost, on the other hand, is more functional and beginner-friendly, allowing you to handle not only your account but also the primary website-related settings.
Control panel comparison
Both Namecheap and Bluehost employ the cPanel control interface. The distinction is that Namecheap utilises cPanel as the primary administration tool, whereas Bluehost only uses it for advanced management features.
If you’ve been dealing with website hosting for a long, you’ll be familiar with Namecheap’s control panel.
It is Namecheap’s primary hosting administration panel. Everything you require is just a click away. WordPress and Joomla may be installed here. Email, file, database, and SSL control are all available through the cPanel. This control panel is well-known for its simplicity and usefulness, so it should be simple to use for newcomers.
Bluehost also use a slightly modified version of cPanel. You may access it by selecting “Advanced” from the left-hand menu.
Bluehost, on the other hand, employs cPanel for more complex administrative features including as databases, cron tasks, and SSH access. Meanwhile, all of the important settings may be configured using the native account management interface. As a result, cPanel may not even be required for novices.
Bluehost, for example, opted to remove the usual “Domains” control from the cPanel. It is now accessible from the main dashboard. So “Advanced” lives up to its billing.
Overall, Bluehost did make some changes to its control interface to improve its game. Namecheap vs Bluehost comparison results in a tie. The biggest distinction is that Namecheap utilises it as the primary administration tool, whereas Bluehost offers it as a bonus.
Extra hosting management features
Aside from the primary control panels, both hosts offer several unique characteristics that make them stand out. Namecheap provides a free logo creator. Bluehost, on the other hand, knocks it out of the water with tools like site staging and marketing management.
Namecheap provides you with free access to its logo creator. It is a very simple tool with few customization options. Just not much. However, it is quite good if you want to get certain ideas out of your system.
The logo will be straightforward and unremarkable, but it will be available for free download. And not all free logo creators permit this.
Bluehost arguably provides more superior tools like as staging and marketing management.
Staging allows you to make a duplicate of your website. This copy becomes your sandbox, where you may play about with your site as you choose. There’s no need to be concerned about things breaking or slowing. Your original site remains unchanged, and you may only make modifications to it when (or if) you choose.
It’s under the Bluehost plugin in the WordPress admin panel. It is quite simple to make a clone. You’re done in a few clicks. The same is true for deploying the updates to the live site.
Furthermore, Bluehost allows you to set up marketing campaigns directly from your dashboard. Google My Business and Google Ads are already connected for ease of use.
+ Google My Business will integrate your website with Google Maps. It will help you rank for more indirect inquiries like “nearby café.”
+ Google Ads is a straightforward ad management.
You can get by without these tools. However, if you’re a newcomer, it’s critical to ensure that your site is functioning and has a noticeable presence.
Bluehost offers more valuable supplementary features than Namecheap. Another feature to add to Bluehost’s simplicity of use and usefulness.
To summarise, both services are really simple to use. Namecheap and Bluehost both utilise the native administration interface, which is integrated with cPanel. Bluehost’s hosting administration and additional tools, on the other hand, are more functional and user-friendly.
WINNER
Bluehost
Namecheap vs Bluehost -- Performance
Namecheap vs Bluehost has a clear winner in terms of performance. Bluehost was far more dependable, with high uptime and quick loading times. Namecheap’s performance was also less than adequate. It did, however, manage more traffic on the site.
Uptime and response time
Both suppliers were investigated during a separate time period. Bluehost was tracked for somewhat more than two months, whereas Namecheap was monitored for around two weeks.
Namecheap experienced 16 outages in just two weeks, totaling 31 minutes of downtime. As a result, the uptime was exceedingly low at 99.82 percent. It’s more more problematic when you consider Namecheap’s 100% uptime promise… So, where exactly is it?
The reaction time was 1.05s, which was not much better. Just keep in mind that the market average is 600ms.
During the testing period, Bluehost experienced 6 outages, resulting in 11 minutes of downtime. Even though the response time was not particularly steady, it was significantly faster than Namecheap’s. Bluehost has a very acceptable average response time of 361ms.
Overall, Bluehost performed far better. The uptime was consistent, at 99.99 percent. The response time was also excellent. Namecheap is at the opposite end of the spectrum. The claimed 100 percent uptime is absent, and the response time is significantly longer than the industry norm.
Website loading time
Both providers are housed in US data centres, and the load test is also done in the US. This implies you’re getting the best outcomes when there’s no extra-distance strain.
The location of the server also has an impact on performance outcomes. Namecheap has servers in the United States, the European Union, and the United Kingdom. However, both the UK and the EU cost an additional $1 each month. Bluehost, on the other hand, solely has data centres in the United States.
Namecheap, like uptime and response time, suffers from a lack of speed. It has a Largest Contentful Paint (LCP) time of 2.3 seconds. And it’s having difficulty. The maximum time for this measurement is 2.5s. Anything above that may place you on Google’s bad list.
LCP is one of the factors used by Google when ranking websites on the search results page. Furthermore, this duration is frequently almost identical to Fully Loaded Time. Only then will the visitor be able to freely engage with the site.
Unfortunately, that is not the situation here. The Fully Loaded Time for Namecheap is 2.7s. This also barely fits within the recommended threes. The approximate time at which visitors begin to realise that the site does not load instantly is 3 seconds.
And what about sluggish websites? We’re leaving.
We had a different story with Bluehost. The LCP is far from perfect here as well, but it’s significantly superior to Namecheap’s. Bluehost’s LCP and Fully Loaded Time are both 1.8 seconds.
Stress testing results
The stress test is the last performance test. I send 50 virtual bots to the webpage and have them explore about. This test demonstrates how effectively each provider manages an increase in visitor volume.
Is the server quick to respond? What is the greatest number of guests it can accommodate? Let’s see what happens.
Despite the fact that Namecheap did not succeed with 50 visitors, it pleasantly surprised me by managing 30 VUs.
The blue line (reaction time) contains few leaps but is generally balanced. The average reaction time was 267ms, which was excellent. However, even though it passed, Namecheap still failed to deliver 83 requests. Something tells me we’ve gone through the roof here.
Bluehost’s findings startled me even more, and not in a good way. This is the first performance test in which Bluehost was defeated by Namecheap.
Bluehost’s initial pass had 15 visitors.
The blue line (response time) went insane, indicating that the increased pressure (grey line – number of visitors) on the server performed its job and slowed it down.
This is reflected in the average reaction time, which has increased to 1.7s. This appears to be the maximum as well.
These are not excellent outcomes, but 15 VUs is not a tiny amount either. Only performance-oriented shared hosting providers should be able to handle 50VUs.
In a nutshell, Namecheap and Bluehost were not equivalent in terms of performance. Bluehost was the clear favourite. The supplier demonstrated consistent uptime and a quick loading time. Namecheap’s overall statistics were dismal, despite the fact that it handled more traffic than Bluehost.
WINNER
Bluehost
Namecheap vs Bluehost -- Website security
Namecheap provides extra security measures to secure both servers and websites. Bluehost, on the other hand, loves to charge extra for the majority of popular security measures. Fortunately, both solutions provide the essentials, such as SSL certificates and DDoS protection.
Namecheap and Bluehost both provide free SSL and handle the installation. However, whereas Bluehost makes activation simple, Namecheap only purports to be simple. SSL didn’t operate correctly till I contacted support.
Furthermore, Cloudflare is used by Bluehost for CDN, and activation is as simple as two clicks in your dashboard. Namecheap makes use of Supersonic CDN, which is a considerably less well-known and respected provider.
Now for the advanced features:
- In addition to the previously stated Supersonic CDN, Namecheap features a Web Application Firewall (WAF). This manner, you can defend the website from risks like SQL injection and cyber attacks. Although you must pay for this one, which starts at $8.88/mo.
- Bluehost does not include a firewall by default. You must buy one, which is not inexpensive. It costs $5.99 per month.
- The issue is also hazy when it comes to backups:
- Namecheap Stellar Plus and Stellar Business have free automatic backups. Stellar, on the other hand, follows the same policy as Bluehost for Basic and Plus. ‘We may or may not do backups.’ The option to purchase backups with Stellar appears to be absent as well.
- To obtain backup options with Bluehost, you must purchase at least Choice Plus. Otherwise, there will be a $32.95/year surcharge.
In the end, both companies provide enough security protections for shared hosting. To be honest, an ordinary Joe doesn’t need all of those sophisticated options. However, if you want to do business, you may choose to contribute to more sophisticated security measures.
WINNER
Bluehost
Namecheap vs Bluehost -- Support
When it comes to customer service, both candidates provide 24-hour support. Namecheap offers live chat as well as ticketing, whereas Bluehost offers both live chat and phone assistance. Namecheap, on the other hand, is far superior in terms of quality.
I always use live chat as my first option. That is precisely what I tried for my Namecheap vs Bluehost comparison. After all, talking on the phone is unpleasant, emails are time-consuming, and why read the knowledge base when someone can answer your problem?
I asked the identical query to both suppliers. I was curious about the free CDN that is available in all subscriptions. Where can I locate it, and is it immediately active, or do I need to do anything?
I started by contacting Namecheap. I was connected to an agent in under a minute, which is rather good. The representative was kind, and the responses were prompt.
I immediately received a link to where I could discover the free CDN and what standards I needed to complete in order to utilise it. This section demonstrated to me that the agent was competent and knew exactly what he was talking about.
However, the portion about how to put it up was left unaddressed, so I inquired once again.
This time, I received a more general explanation and a link to the knowledge base. This isn’t a terrible thing, but I’d prefer get a short step-by-step from an agent than read a long piece. I wouldn’t have called the live chat in the first place if I desired that.
Now we’ll move over to Bluehost’s live chat. I’m going to tell you right away that Bluehost let me down here.
The wait was not too long. It took me 4 minutes to connect with an agent, which is good. I was advised that it may take up to 5 minutes, but they’re doing OK so far.
But that’s the end of the good news. Following that, the responses were sluggish and lacking detail. I received no connections, no guidance, and only one-sentence responses.
That is perfectly OK. They did, to a degree, address my question. However, the chat lasted 20 minutes… TWENTY.
It’s a little underwhelming for something so easy. It almost seemed as if I was annoying the agent. Let me tell you, it’s not nice.
Aside from the live chat feature, both companies provide rather comprehensive and well-organized knowledge libraries. There are articles, blog entries, frequently asked questions, tutorials, and instructions.
What I’d like to point out is that Namecheap’s knowledge base appears to be easier to explore.
Everything is carefully ordered, as you can see. There are several subjects other than hosting, and you may view the most recent articles. That appeals to me.
Bluehost, on the other hand, approached their knowledge base in a more straightforward manner.
There are a few categories specified there, but the rest is up to you to find. I’m not suggesting there’s anything wrong with it. I just prefer the way Namecheap does it.
The main result is that, while Bluehost has more help options, I preferred Namecheap’s live chat. It has a more well-organized information base, and the agent was more nicer. That is not to claim that Bluehost’s customer service is without flaws. Simply said, not all agents are completely devoted to resolving every issue.
WINNER
Bluehost
Namecheap vs Bluehost: Our Recommendation
We’ve shown in this Namecheap vs Bluehost comparison that low costs aren’t everything. Bluehost is more expensive, but you receive far better quality, simplicity of use, performance, and security for the money. Namecheap’s lower-cost options and quick customer service cannot compensate for its poor performance.
Bluehost came up on top overall. Its dashboard is slightly better and more user-friendly. Furthermore, the performance is far superior to that of Namecheap. Bluehost is therefore the greatest choice if you are creating a company website, an online store, or any other website that will produce revenue.
WINNER
Bluehost
Alternatives to Namecheap vs Bluehost
Namecheap isn’t really amazing, and Bluehost isn’t for everyone. I understand that needs vary, and there are several possibilities. For example, if you want something less expensive than Namecheap, Hostinger can be a good option. However, if you need something more business-oriented, HostGator is a great alternative.
Hostinger
Hostinger is a lot cheaper than both Bluehost and HostGator. However, unlike both of them, it delivers even better performance. User experience, customer support, and all the basics are also top-quality.
The cheapest Hostinger shared hosting plan is only $2.59/month, and the resources you get are quite generous. Free SSL certificates and generous storage will be waiting for you.
HostGator
HostGator is almost the same price as Bluehost and somewhat more expensive than Namecheap. The most affordable shared hosting package is $2.75 per month. It provides WordPress shared, VPS, Cloud, and dedicated hosting. It also has its own website builder, Gator, which isn’t half bad.
The service provider provides an extremely user-friendly control panel. You may create your entire website from there. As a result, it’s an excellent choice for beginners. You get the complete package: simplicity and performance.
Namecheap vs Bluehost FAQs
Is Namecheap suitable for an e-shop?
No, I wouldn’t recommend Namecheap for an e-commerce site. Especially on shared servers, which have shown to provide poor performance. Personally, I would avoid more expensive plans in favour of a more dependable service.
Which provider offers better VPS hosting options?
Namecheap, in my opinion, provides superior VPS hosting. When comparing Namecheap and Bluehost’s VPS options, you’ll see that the lowest packages give almost identical results, but Namecheap is less expensive. Namecheap’s Pulsar plan is $11.88, whereas Bluehost’s Standard plan costs $18.99. However, once again, performance is at stake.
