Global Web Performance

A living number, not a fixed one

The Web in Numbers is a snapshot, tests run over a set window, written up once, dated. This page updates daily instead. The dataset keeps growing and shifting as more tests come in, so the numbers here today won’t be the numbers here next month.

Where that’s actually useful

This page isn’t a standalone benchmarking product. It’s what is produced as a byproduct of Enterramon, and Enterramon Pro actually testing sites, the numbers piled up, so we put them on a page and shared them. What that’s actually good for is a fuzzy comparison, not a verdict. An agency checking a new client’s HSTS score against this dashboard isn’t getting an audit, just a rough sense of whether that score is unremarkable or genuinely behind. Take a look at Cyber Attack Map, it tracks how much of the traffic hitting an unused IP on any given day turns out to be a scan, a probe, or something worse.

Same goes for hosting providers. If your network shows up in the ASN breakdown, that’s not us tracking you deliberately, it’s just what the data looks like once enough tests happen to land on domains sitting on your infrastructure. Still useful to glance at, just don’t mistake it for something purpose built to watch you.

Read as a whole, these numbers are the average bar for sites that get tested. If you’re running an agency, average shouldn’t be the target, it’s the thing you’re meant to be sitting above. Enterramon Pro is built for that, measuring your clients consistently and continuously rather than checking in against a snapshot every so often.

It’s also just a faster gut-check than running a fresh manual comparison every time someone asks "is this normal." Someone on a team asks whether a 900ms TTFB is bad, and instead of guessing or digging up an old benchmark, there’s a live page for that. It changes what "normal" means as the underlying web changes, rather than freezing it at whatever it happened to be when someone last wrote it down.

What it isn’t

It’s still an aggregate built from whatever sites happened to get tested, not a controlled sample and not a census. It skews toward whoever’s actually running tests, and that mix shifts over time in ways nobody’s curating on purpose. None of the numbers here are a verdict on your specific site, they’re a backdrop for judging your own numbers against, and that’s a different and more limited thing than a proper audit.

If you want the deeper interpretation, the actual commentary on what these figures mean and why they look the way they do, that’s what the linked article is for. This page exists to keep the raw comparison point current after that piece stops being current itself.