About Us
Services
Our clients
Press Room
Careers
Policies
Buttons
Performance Tracking
Blog
Performance Tracking  > 2017 Hurricane Season

WebSitePulse 2017 Hurricane Season Web Performance Report Summary


Hurricane season finally came to its end and so is the monitoring of the five of the most popular weather websites that we monitored for our 2017 Hurricane Season Web Performance Report. For the purpose of this Performance Report, WebSitePulse measured the performance of the websites home pages as well as a complete web transaction like an end user would interact with the website.

The report measures Uptime and Response Time as the most important metrics for the availability and the reliability of all web-based operations. Measurements of the multi-step online transactions were made every 15 minutes, simultaneously from 3 different monitoring locations: Trumbull, CT (US East Coast), San Francisco, CA (US West Coast) and Chicago, IL (US Central).

Unfortunately this year hurricane Irma hit hard the US shores. Irma was an extremely powerful category 5 hurricane. This hurricane was the strongest one observed in the Atlantic since Wilma in 2005 in terms of maximum sustained wind speed.

We noticed an increase in the average response time of the 5 monitored sites on Sep 5th (2.664 sec) and Sep 6th (3.668 sec) and decrease in the average daily uptime – 99.39% (Sep 5th) and 99.14% (Sep 6th). We believe the root cause of this increase was hurricane Irma hitting the US mainland - South Florida.

Beside that time frame the overall uptime and speed of the monitored weather websites were quite good during the whole period.

We have found out the daily average response time from all monitored websites was 0.936 sec. The daily average responses by locations are as follow:
  • Trumbull, CT (US East Coast) – 0.943 sec
  • San Francisco, CA (US West Coast) – 1.022 sec
  • Chicago, IL (US Central) – 0.824 sec

This year The National Hurricane Center (nhc.noaa.gov) was the speed leader among the 5 monitored websites with an average response time of 0.525 seconds, followed by salvationarmy.org (0.647 sec). Far away at the bottom of the table was redcross.org with 1.962 seconds average response time which may have frustrated some of its visitors.

The daily average uptime for the entire group of 5 websites for 2017 hurricane season was 99.94%. The daily average uptime by locations are as follow:
  • Trumbull, CT (US East Coast) – 99.95%
  • San Francisco, CA (US West Coast) – 99.95%
  • Chicago, IL (US Central) – 99.94%

The winner with 100% average uptime for this year’s hurricane season is weather.com, followed by nhc.noaa.gov (99.991%). At the bottom of the availability chart stands redcross.org with 99.865% which is not that bad at all.

Average Response times for the whole period
#TargetTrumbull, CTSan Francisco, CAChicago, ILAvg. resp. time
1nhc.noaa.gov0.4930.5260.3450.455
2salvationarmy.org0.5380.6840.5010.574
3weather.com0.9471.0680.6080.874
4floridadisaster.org1.0111.2121.0951.106
5redcross.org1.7181.6191.5711.636

Average Uptime for the whole period
#TargetTrumbull, CTSan Francisco, CAChicago, ILAvg. uptime
1weather.com100.000%100.000%100.000%100.000%
2nhc.noaa.gov99.991%99.994%99.988%99.991%
3salvationarmy.org99.926%99.947%99.955%99.943%
4floridadisaster.org99.930%99.928%99.900%99.919%
5redcross.org99.877%99.864%99.854%99.865%

Best regards, and takeITeasy™ with WebSitePulse™

Iavor Marinoff, CEO

Report Methodology:
WebSitePulse Performance Reports measure Uptime and Response Time as the most important metrics for the availability and the reliability of any web-based operation. Performance measurement took place daily, every 15 minutes during the entire Hurricane season, between the hours of 6AM and 3AM EST. The WebSitePulse website monitoring service was used to collect data and to create the reports.
The simultaneous monitoring is performed from 3 US locations of the WebSitePulse monitoring network: Trumbull, CT, San Francisco, CA and Chicago, IL. In case of a detected malfunction or unavailability, the system performs automated error verification from 3 independent resources and only after the above procedure is performed and has returned consistent results, the detected error is confirmed, recorded, and included in the daily performance reports. In these cases, an advanced WebSitePulse exclusive feature comes into play - Forced Monitoring - which automatically switches to a 3 minute - monitoring interval for increased accuracy.

About WebSitePulse:
WebSitePulse is a leading provider of global, independent, and objective availability and performance monitoring of web sites, servers, network components, web applications, e-business- and email round-trip transactions.

Contact:
For more information about this report please contact:
George T., CTO
phone: 1-407-380-1600
email:


Reproduction:
WebSitePulse launched the Performance and Uptime Reports program to keep the general public and the Internet community informed about the performance of specific websites and the challenges their webmasters, owners and operators are facing on a daily basis, especially when the web traffic intensifies due to some special events through the year. Some of the most popular web destinations, related to each particular event, are selected for the purpose of the Reports, and data from their performance measurements is made available on the WebSitePulse public website.

With the intention to broadly disseminate this information for the benefit of the Internet community, we encourage the use of this information without prior approval and under the following Terms and Conditions:
  • WebSitePulse should be referred as the "Source" of the information;
  • WebSitePulse should be acknowledged as the owner of the copyrights of the information in the Reports;
  • The texts of the Reports could be changed or altered to better suit the needs and the style of the publisher without prior notice to WebSitePulse. However, the integrity and the meaning of the information should be preserved;

The Data from the performance measurements cannot be changed or manipulated and should be used "as is".