Both BlueHost and FatCow are not stranger to most web hosting shoppers. Both companies started business in the late 90s, both focus in shared hosting services, and both are highly rated among webmasters. It’s easy to see why people tend to compare BlueHost and FatCow. In this article, we are going to dig deep and find out who has the best between FatCow and BlueHost hosting.
Compare FatCow and BlueHost Hosting Plans
To get things started, let’s have a quick check on FatCow and BlueHost hosting features.
|Web Hosting Features||FatCow||BlueHost|
|Auto Script Installater||In-House||SimpleScripts & Fantastico|
|Agora Shopping Cart||–||Yes|
As you can see the major differences between the two are the quantity of mySQL databases and the control panel software. From what I know, BlueHost runs a tight restriction on the amount of MySQL databases you can add into your account. While they are offering unlimited disk storage and hosting bandwidth, they limit your database capacity at 100.
While most webmasters prefer cPanel (because of familiarity I guess), I don’t see any big dissimilarity between cPanel and vDeck. Hence, I wouldn’t suggest you to use this as a deciding factor for your purchase.
Pricing: FatCow vs BlueHost
BlueHost cost $83.4 to $95.4 annually (depends on your subscription period); while FatCow, after special discount offer at W.H.S.R., cost $57.96 per year (35% discount from the original $7.5/mo).
Popularity: FatCow vs BlueHost
Web Search Interest
From Google Insights (in hosting related categories), BlueHost clearly outranked FatCow in term popularity, with a score of 63 – in contrast of FatCow’s score of 12.
BlueHost searches come from all around the world; while FatCow hosting is interested mainly by the west.
Customer Supports: FatCow vs BlueHost
Both BlueHost and FatCow customers are supported 24/7 via phone, live chat, and email ticketing system.
BlueHost live chat system is powered by AliveChat; while FatCow system is supported by LivePerson. I have personally tested both live chat systems several times and I found both are doing okay. Not that they are doing extraordinary well; but it’s totally acceptable for web hosts in this price range.
Additionally, BlueHost host a user-support forum. BlueHost users can share and solve their problems via message board discussions.
Green Energy Hosting: FatCow vs BlueHost
Electricity consumption (servers and offices) at FatCow is fully offset by wind-generated Renewable Energy Certificates (REC) from Community Energy Inc (CEI) – this makes FatCow hosting 100% green.
On the other hand, there is no news of BlueHost going green so far.
My conclusion: FatCow or BlueHost?
What I think about Bluehost and FatCow hosting?
I spent years with BlueHost as customer and have been using FatCow for more than a year now. In overall, I am happy with both at the moment.
It’s worth noting that I had some really bad time with BlueHost hosting back in January/Febuary 2009 where the server is heavily loaded (sign of unmanaged overselling!) and my database server is on and off broken. Nevertheless, the problem is solved by now.
FatCow hosting, on the other hand, is doing superbly well in my record. Fast and reliable server, responsive customer supports, and peace-of-mind daily backup service – all in just $4.83/mo. This is why I rated them as my top hosting service along with Hostgator.
So who should you go with – FatCow or BlueHost?
At this point of writing, I’m strongly convinced that FatCow is the better choice. Not to say that BlueHost is bad; but the pricing is a huge aspect that separate the two and FatCow is a lot cheaper. Unless you are biased towards BlueHost’s cPanel; else I don’t see why you should choose them over FatCow.
Visit FatCow and BlueHost online