Bluehost, headquartered in Orem, Utah, offers website hosting. Bluehost also offers managed WordPress hosting, with optional SEO and marketing tools for WordPress plans.
$19.95
per month for 36 month term
SiteGround
Score 9.8 out of 10
N/A
SiteGround offers website hosting, as well as managed WordPress, managed Woo Commerce, fully managed cloud services available to support a variety of services, as well as reselling.
Bluehost stacks up against them by providing a variety of plans which gives decision-making power to the customers. Also, it has a built-in website builder.
Bluehost is somewhat similar in terms of their tech stack and somewhat similar in terms of pricing. I think for websites that want to remain small and operate on the lowest budget possible, Bluehost is sufficient. For websites that are interested in scaling, or need top-tier, …
Bluehost did not stack up against HostGator; in fact, HostGator was where we ended up migrating after we realized Bluehost was not for us. Bluehost is not geared toward businesses, especially ones like ours that have a very customized site. HostGator allowed us the …
Bluehost is more expensive, but they offer a more complete set of tools and seem far better equipped to handle WordPress sites. We wanted the ability to grow our site if necessary and felt Bluehost offered more potential than GoDaddy for long-term support.
GoDaddy & Network Solutions are both priced similarly. I recommend Bluehost over both of these because of its support and upgrade cycles. NS hasn't been updated in what seems like a decade. GoDaddy, on top of its shady advertising and predatory behavior, has terrible support.
Prior to moving over to Bluehost, I was using GoDaddy for 3 years which initially suited me but as I wanted more features and planned on selling products online I noticed the add-ons started adding up. For example, I had to find a free SSL certificate outside of Godaddy as they …
I originally started in Bluehost when I took on a portfolio of existing business websites to manage. In an effort to consolidate my client base into one hosting service, I opted to move hosting and domains to GoDaddy, who is my preferred hosting service. When I started the …
I found WordPress installation to be easier with Bluehost. 1&1 offers a monthly payment plan whereas you have to pay for the entire year with Bluehost.
I found that Bluehost had a better UX and better prices. It was easier to navigate, easy to update key settings and the 1 touch Wordpress install and automatic Wordpress updates (at the time) made Bluehost a better choice. Also, GoDaddy was having issues with uptime at that …
We have used other hosting systems such as HostGator and GoDaddy. We had security problems with GoDaddy and HostGator had performance difficulties. With Bluehost we were able to get a solid, secure hosting service overcome our security and performance concerns. While GoDaddy …
Bluehost's VPS offering gives me full control over my container which I don't get with Dreamhost. The size of the container is much more desirable for hosting multiple products, over and above DigitalOcean, and the control panel for Bluehost is far more intuitive than AWS'.
I used Namescheap in the past. I believe Namescheap is a big company compared to SiteGround, as big as godaddy. I think because of that, you get what you expect. Good services, but maybe more costly and you have to pay for everything as extra. Email $5, SSL $10, CDN $10 etc …
SiteGround had superior customer service and site uptime. Overall we found SiteGround, an easier provider to work with, both from a user interface and customer experience perspective. It was much easier to set up a Wordpress build using SiteGround than through iPage, and we …
I chose SiteGround because we needed that personal touch. Other service providers we have used before have terrible customer/tech support. We chose SiteGround and we will continue to use them as our quality service provider because their technical support has been outstanding. …
Sadly, most web hosting companies are either not user-friendly or lack necessary features. No other web hosting company I've used has provided the level of reliability, features, and affordability that I've found with SiteGround with the exception of WP Engine which is a …
In terms of customer support in resolving tickets, I believe SiteGround is much better than others out there. Unlike Bluehost which when reached puts your call on hold and have longer waiting queues then SiteGround. They do followup to see if you are running into issues. They …
GoDaddy and BlueHost offer grossly sub-par performance in 2017 for a price point that doesn't make sense. At least GoDaddy has great tech support - but I shouldn't have to rely on it as often as I do if all was working as it should.
SiteGround is the BEST option if you are looking for price and have a small web project. Compared to other services who want to say the same, I never had a site go down, reach memory capacity, have my information sold off to, etc. SiteGround provides what they say they can …
Bluehost is a decent all-around choice for web hosting with professional web development and domain management features that are particularly ideal for WordPress websites and blogs. They have a good reputation within the industry as a company that invests heavily in new technology and platform innovation. Bluehost has made a lot of improvements to customize their back-end administration (AMP & control panel) by working to improve the usability and design of the browser interface. Bluehost is primarily focused on customers who use WordPress and we would recommend either their hybrid cloud or managed WordPress platform, which provides everything that you need to build and maintain a popular website. All in all, Bluehost is a well-established brand that continually improves its hosting products, regularly upgrades their data center hardware, and is generally considered a leader in the development of new cloud hosting platform services.
I used other hosting providers in the past and actually I'm very happy with SiteGround mainly because of this: * very quick to setup and install my Wordpress website * sends me weekly emails about traffic, website healthscore etc * great wordpress plugins to help with SEO and optimizing
You get a number of page views as a guide to your bandwidth, and a fixed amount of disk space on the server. So you know what you have to work with. No hazy promises of “unlimited” resources.
If you pay more, you’re allocated a server with fewer accounts, so there’s less chance you’ll be slowed down by your neighbors.
Its self-help material is pretty good — close to InMotion Hosting for knowledgebase quality.
SiteGround tackles slow speeds from all angles, using SSD storage, Nginx, SuperCacher, CloudFlare CDN, and HHVM.
I use Wordpress for my website on Bluehost, so I already know how it works and happy with it. I gave it this rating as I love the fact that If you do plan on creating multiple websites on Bluehost you'll be able to create specific login access for each website sites making it less likely to enter into the wrong website accounts. Which makes it even easier to manage client websites if you plan to create and host websites on behalf of your clients.
When we decided to migrate away from Bluehost, a quick call to their tech-support solved most of our problems, and we immediately got our money back. They did — to their credit — try to accommodate us, but they realize that we needed something else that they couldn’t accommodate. And once that realization set in, customer service immediately refunded us our money.
Three ways to get customer support, phone, email, and chat. Chat is available 24/7 and the agents are always friendly and very helpful. In all the instances where I needed assistance chat support agents were always available to help. Wait time is minimal and on rare occasions I had to call, the agents were very helpful as well. I can not remember a time I walked away from support without my question or concern being resolved.
Bluehost is somewhat similar in terms of their tech stack and somewhat similar in terms of pricing. I think for websites that want to remain small and operate on the lowest budget possible, Bluehost is sufficient. For websites that are interested in scaling, or need top-tier, USA-based tech support 24/7 at their fingertips, then other hosting providers may be better.
GoDaddy and Bluehost offer grossly sub-par performance in 2017 for a price point that doesn't make sense. At least GoDaddy has great tech support - but I shouldn't have to rely on it as often as I do if all was working as it should. inMotion was overly complex on the backend, and lacked some common hosting features (easy WordPress installs for one) that are common across all other hosts. WPEngine, had great performance, and decent support, but their own proprietary backend interface was always a shift when switching between them and cpanel. Also - VERY expensive compared to SiteGround for comparable (if not lesser) service & performance.
The website is slow. The speed is not reliable. Sometimes, sites would go down without warning. You would have to get a VPS to get consistent speed. If you have small website as a hobby, then Bluehost will be sufficient. Otherwise, I recommend looking for something more fast. Storage is good, but speed is lacking
Because of their level of service and support, we were able to create our web presence in-house without the need to hire an external firm or consultant. Consequently, Bluehost has more than paid for itself.
The efficiency of the all-in-one solution means our web person doesn't have to spend time logging into different sites and managing different accounts, and the business office only has to pay one vendor.
All the sites I've set up at SiteGround are performing faster than they did at their previous hosting provider. This yields a superior customer experience and higher Google/SEO rankings.
Their service has been rock solid, necessitating little support (which is admittedly less than ideal for my support business, but a boon for my clients bottom line) and zero downtime.
Easy to get new sites up and running, which speeds creation of new businesses and rapid deployment of conceptual campaigns.