I see this question in WooCommerce groups every week: "SiteGround or Cloudways?" The answers usually compare features, support, or uptime — but they never do the math on what each host actually costs you over 3 years, including the revenue you lose to speed.
This is the math that nobody gives you.
The raw hosting cost (what most people compare)
SiteGround's intro pricing looks unbeatable. Cloudways looks expensive. But the intro price is a lie — here's what you actually pay:
| Period | SiteGround | Cloudways |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 (promo) | $2.99/mo ($35.88) | $14/mo ($168) |
| Year 2 (renewal) | $17.99/mo ($215.88) | $14/mo ($168) |
| Year 3 (renewal) | $17.99/mo ($215.88) | $14/mo ($168) |
| 3-Year Total | $467.64 | $504 |
Cloudways costs $36 more over 3 years. On raw hosting cost alone, SiteGround wins. Most comparison articles stop here.
But this is the wrong comparison.
The revenue cost (what actually matters)
SiteGround's shared hosting measures 263ms TTFB in our published benchmark dataset — comfortably inside Google's "good" threshold. That is a real, traceable number.
We have not independently measured Cloudways, so this article does not quote a TTFB figure for it. That matters: the version of this comparison you may have seen elsewhere rested on an 80–200ms Cloudways figure we cannot trace to any measurement, and a $5,700/year revenue claim built on top of it. Both are gone. What remains below is the part we can defend.
Using the conservative published floor (0.4% conversion loss per 100ms):
| Metric | SiteGround | Cloudways |
|---|---|---|
| Measured TTFB | 263ms | not independently measured |
| TTFB gap | unknown — we have not measured Cloudways | |
| Conversion impact | cannot be computed without the gap | |
| Revenue impact ($10K/mo store) | see the scenario table below | |
Because the gap is unknown, we can't put a single number on Cloudways' speed benefit. What we can do is show you what any gap would be worth, so you can price it yourself once you have a measurement:
| If Cloudways is faster by… | Cost on a $10K/mo store (conservative 0.4%/100ms) | Over 3 years |
|---|---|---|
| 100ms | $40/mo | $1,440 |
| 200ms | $80/mo | $2,880 |
| 300ms | $120/mo | $4,320 |
| 400ms | $160/mo | $5,760 |
At the higher published estimate (2.1% per 100ms on desktop, from Deloitte), every row scales by about 5x — a 400ms gap would be $840/mo. Treat the low column as the floor you can defend and the high one as the optimistic case. Measure both hosts yourself and you'll know which column you're in.
"Cloudways costs $36 more over three years in hosting. Whether that pays for itself depends on a TTFB gap we haven't measured — here's how to find out."
FutureStack — Cloudways vs SiteGround TCO Research futurestk.online/blog/cloudways-vs-siteground-tco.htmlThe real 3-year cost (hosting + revenue)
Put both costs together:
| Cost Component | SiteGround | Cloudways |
|---|---|---|
| 3-year hosting cost | $468 | $504 |
| 3-year revenue loss | unquantified without a measured gap | |
| 3-Year Hosting Cost (known) | $468 | $504 |
| Hosting difference | Cloudways costs $36 more over 3 years | |
So the honest framing: Cloudways costs $36 more over three years than SiteGround, and that is the only number here we can defend outright. The speed case is a question, not a conclusion — and it only becomes an answer once you measure both. If the gap turns out to be 300ms or more, the $36 pays for itself many times over on a $10K/mo store. If it's 50ms, it doesn't. Run the check before you decide.
Enter your traffic, conversion rate, and AOV into the Revenue Leak Detector. See your monthly loss in 30 seconds.
Where SiteGround actually wins
I want to be fair. SiteGround isn't a bad host — it's a bad value for stores that generate revenue. Here's where it genuinely wins:
Initial cost. If you're running a blog, portfolio, or non-commerce site, SiteGround's $2.99/mo intro is a legitimate deal. Speed-driven conversion loss doesn't apply to you when you're not selling anything.
Support. SiteGround's support is consistently rated higher than Cloudways for WordPress-specific issues. If you need hand-holding on setup, SiteGround's team is more accessible.
Simplicity. SiteGround's interface is simpler for beginners. Cloudways is a cloud platform — more powerful, but steeper learning curve.
But for a WooCommerce store doing real revenue? These advantages are real but modest. Whether they outweigh Cloudways' $36-over-three-years premium depends entirely on the TTFB gap — which we have not measured. At a 200ms gap on a $10K/mo store, Cloudways pays for itself many times over. At a 50ms gap, it doesn't. Run the check and the argument settles itself.
When Cloudways is the obvious choice
Your store does more than $5,000/month. At that revenue level, even a modest TTFB gap is worth more per month than Cloudways costs. Measure the gap first, and if it's 200ms or better, Cloudways pays for itself in the first month.
You're on a renewal. If you're already paying SiteGround's $17.99/mo renewal, you're paying almost Cloudways prices for slower infrastructure. Switching is a pure upgrade.
You care about Core Web Vitals. Google uses LCP, INP, and CLS as ranking signals. Cloudways' faster TTFB directly improves your CWV scores and organic traffic.
When SiteGround makes sense
You're just starting out. If you're building your first store and haven't launched yet, SiteGround's $2.99/mo gets you live. Upgrade to Cloudways when revenue starts flowing.
Non-commerce site. Blog, portfolio, SaaS marketing site — speed matters less when you're not losing checkout revenue.
Tight budget, no revenue yet. If you can't afford $14/mo, SiteGround at $2.99/mo is better than not having a site at all.
If your WooCommerce store is generating revenue and you're still on SiteGround shared hosting, you're paying more for less in the invoice. The $36-over-three-years gap to Cloudways is small enough that it should be decided by measurement, not by our marketing — and we don't have a Cloudways TTFB measurement to offer you. If speed is the deciding factor, run the free TTFB check against both from your own network and let the numbers settle it.
Further reading
- WooCommerce Site Speed & Revenue Lost — the full math on speed-to-revenue for WooCommerce stores
- How Slow Hosting Costs You Sales — the general TTFB → revenue breakdown
- What Is Price-Lock Hosting? — hosts that don't spike at renewal
- Hostinger Renewal Price Shock — another comparison with budget hosts
FAQ
Not on our data, and we won't pretend otherwise. We have measured SiteGround at 263ms but have not measured Cloudways, so we can't tell you the gap between them. If speed is your deciding factor, the defensible move is to run the free TTFB check against your current host and against Cloudways from your own network, then decide on the result.
SiteGround uses introductory pricing to acquire customers, then charges renewal rates that are 501% higher. This is a common hosting industry practice — Cloudways avoids it with price-lock renewal.
Cloudways is a cloud platform, so there's a learning curve. But for WooCommerce stores, the performance difference outweighs the setup complexity. Most store owners adapt within a day.
SiteGround's managed plans are faster than their shared plans, but still more expensive than Cloudways at renewal — and Cloudways' managed cloud infrastructure typically outperforms SiteGround's managed WordPress tier.