Compared, not rankedThirty-five offshore hosts, and what each one puts in writing.
Every host in this market says the same four things. These pages check which of them publish a document behind it — a canary, a retention figure, a count of takedown notices — and say plainly when somebody else is the better buy.
How to read these
Three states, and one of them is “we could not find out”.
Each comparison runs the same twelve rows against the other host’s own public pages. A row is marked published, or not, or partly — and where we could not find an answer on their site, it says exactly that rather than guessing.
That last state is the point of the whole exercise. Nearly every host here states a position on privacy. Very few publish a number, a date or a signature behind it, and the difference between those two things is the only part a buyer can actually check.
- PublishedOn their own site, on the date at the top of the page.
- PartlyTrue of some of the estate, or with conditions attached.
- NoThey publish that they do not, or it is plainly not a product.
- Not publishedWe could not find it. Not an accusation — and correctable.
The comparisons
Pick the one you are already looking at.
Grouped by the kind of host, not ranked. Jump to privacy hosts, DMCA-resistant hosts or mainstream clouds.
Privacy and offshore hosts
The ones that compete with this estate directly: no identity, crypto settlement, and a jurisdiction chosen for its law.
12 hosts
DMCA-resistant and bulletproof-adjacent
Sold on the takedown question. Where the jurisdiction is real, and where it is a policy on a server somewhere ordinary.
12 hosts
Mainstream clouds
Good engineering, and a compliance department. What changes when the company holding your disk is answerable where the complaint is filed.
11 hosts
The bar counts rows, not quality. A host with a small catalogue cannot publish a colocation price, and a one-country host has no second entity to declare — both cost rows without being faults. Read the page, not the bar.
Why a comparison written by a competitor is worth reading at all.
Because the claims are checkable
Every row points at a page on somebody’s site — theirs or ours. Nothing here rests on being believed, and a reader with two tabs open can falsify any of it in about a minute. That is a deliberately uncomfortable way to write, and it is the only kind of comparison worth publishing.
Because it names what they do better
Each page lists what the other host is genuinely good at, and ends with three reasons to buy theirs instead. Some of those reasons are ones we cannot answer: we do not sell domains, we are not the cheapest, and we do not have a decade of court history.
Because it is dated, and wrong sometimes
Their pages change and ours do too. Each comparison carries the date it was last read, and if a row is out of date or simply wrong, tell us and it changes the same day with the date updated.
Or skip the reading and price a build.
No account needed, every price on the page, live in about fifty-five seconds.
Open the configurator See every price