Namecheap’s cPanel hosting is the same service it sells as shared hosting, not a separate product. But how practical is it after purchase? I examined the account tools, support, and real page-speed results. Read on to see the strengths and trade-offs.
I used HostAdvice’s hosting rating methodology to assess pricing, features, performance, ease of use, and support. These ratings reflect the Stellar signup, the cPanel tools, the support conversation, and the two GTmetrix runs described below. They are not measurements of long-term uptime or Namecheap’s other hosting products.
| Parameter | Score | Why This Score |
|---|---|---|
| Prices | 9.4/10 | The 30-day trial reduces upfront risk, but promotional prices increase at renewal. |
| Features | 9.5/10 | cPanel covers files, email, databases, and security, although some extras require higher plans. |
| Performance | 9.1/10 | The US test loaded quickly and smoothly, while the European test was noticeably slower. |
| Ease of Use | 9.3/10 | Registration was straightforward, but checkout promotions and less-visible dashboard controls added friction. |
| Support | 9.0/10 | Chat responses and human escalation were fast, but the agent overlooked important DNS precautions. |
| Overall | 9.3/10 | Strong entry-level hosting with useful tools, tempered by regional speed differences and uneven support depth. |
Namecheap offers several hosting types, but this review covers the cPanel-based Shared Hosting line. It comes in three tiers: Stellar for smaller sites, Stellar Plus for broader multi-site use, and Stellar Business for heavier websites.
Higher tiers expand website capacity and storage and include AutoBackup. The plan widget can show the current charges, so I have kept the comparison focused on what customers receive.
| Plan | Best For | Key Allowances |
|---|---|---|
| Stellar | Small sites and first-time owners | 3 websites, 20 GB SSD, 30 mailboxes |
| Stellar Plus | Growing portfolios and multiple sites | Unlimited websites, unmetered SSD, AutoBackup |
| Stellar Business | Busier sites needing extra resources | Unlimited websites, 50 GB cloud storage (US), AutoBackup |
There are other Namecheap products for different needs. EasyWP is managed WordPress hosting with its own dashboard rather than cPanel.
Reseller hosting adds WHM and separate customer accounts, while VPS and dedicated servers target customers needing more server-level control. I did not test those product families for this cPanel review.
Here are the conditions I would check before ordering:
For me, the strongest pricing benefit is the chance to try the full shared-hosting workflow before committing money. The main caution is the fine print: the trial and money-back guarantee are not two consecutive risk-free periods, and the longer-term price deserves more attention than the introductory offer.
A hosting plan can be simple to buy and manage, but the more important question is how quickly it serves an actual website.
For context, I purchased Namecheap Stellar, its entry-level shared hosting plan with cPanel, three websites, and 20 GB SSD storage. For the speed assessment, I used the live site at 2test.website, hosted on Namecheap shared hosting with its origin server in Chicago, United States.
The performance domain differs from hostadvice.tech, which I connected during the separate Stellar trial signup. I am therefore reporting measurements for 2test.website rather than claiming to have benchmarked the newly activated trial domain.
I ran GTmetrix on the same http://2test.website/ page from two locations: San Antonio, Texas, and Frankfurt, Germany. San Antonio represents a visitor within the United States, closer to the Chicago origin; Frankfurt gives us an international comparison across the Atlantic.
This is useful for business owners because customers do not necessarily browse from the same region as the hosting server. I wanted to see not only how fast the page loaded near its origin, but also what a European visitor might experience.
Both reports were generated on October 19, 2026, using Chrome 154 and Lighthouse 12.6.1. I kept the page URL consistent between runs. They are two lab-test snapshots, not repeated averages, an uptime test, a traffic-load test, or evidence that every Namecheap-hosted site will deliver the same speeds.
The request used HTTP, and GTmetrix recorded redirect time, which is important when interpreting the response-time figures.
Here is how the two runs compared:
| Metric | San Antonio, US | Frankfurt, Germany |
|---|---|---|
| GTmetrix Performance | 88% | 68% |
| GTmetrix Structure | 95% | 91% |
| Time to First Byte | 582 ms | 1.3 s |
| First Contentful Paint | 1.3 s | 2.1 s |
| Largest Contentful Paint | 1.7 s | 3.3 s |
| Total Blocking Time | 2 ms | 0 ms |
| Cumulative Layout Shift | 0 | 0 |
| Time to Interactive | 1.4 s | 2.2 s |
| Onload Time | 1.7 s | 3.3 s |
| Fully Loaded Time | 1.7 s | 3.3 s |
The San Antonio run produced 88% Performance and 95% Structure. First Contentful Paint was 1.3 seconds, so the page began displaying content relatively quickly, and Largest Contentful Paint arrived at 1.7 seconds. The page was also fully loaded in 1.7 seconds, with Time to Interactive at 1.4 seconds.
For a US business targeting nearby customers, that is an encouraging result: visitors were not left waiting several seconds for the main visual content to appear.
The interactivity figures were particularly reassuring. Total Blocking Time was just 2 milliseconds and Cumulative Layout Shift was 0. In practical terms, the test did not identify meaningful blocking from page scripts or visible layout movement as the site loaded. That matters for customers trying to click a navigation item, read product information, or use a form without the page shifting beneath them.
Time to First Byte was 582 milliseconds, but I would not interpret all 582 milliseconds as server processing. GTmetrix broke it into 237 milliseconds of redirect time, 165 milliseconds connecting, and 180 milliseconds of backend time. The redirect and connection phases together accounted for most of that wait. This makes the request path, not only the hosting server, an area to check if I wanted to improve the result further.
For this website and this US test location, Namecheap cPanel hosting delivered a good baseline: content appeared quickly, the main page element finished in under two seconds, and the page stayed stable.
I would be comfortable using this as an encouraging US result, while still checking real-user performance and testing again after any substantial website changes.
Moving the test to Frankfurt exposed the main weakness. Performance fell to 68%, although Structure remained fairly high at 91%. First Contentful Paint increased to 2.1 seconds and Largest Contentful Paint reached 3.3 seconds, up from 1.7 seconds in Texas.
Fully Loaded Time also rose from 1.7 to 3.3 seconds. That is an extra 1.6 seconds before the largest content element appeared and before GTmetrix regarded the page as fully loaded.
For a business serving European shoppers, readers, or prospects, that difference is meaningful. A visitor may see the first content at 2.1 seconds but still wait until 3.3 seconds for the page’s main element. The Frankfurt LCP is also above the commonly used 2.5-second ‘good’ threshold for that metric. This single lab result does not prove anyone abandoned the page or that real users fail Core Web Vitals, but it is enough to justify testing a European audience more carefully.
Time to First Byte was 1.3 seconds in Frankfurt, more than twice the US figure. GTmetrix recorded 589 milliseconds for redirects, 272 milliseconds for connection, and 478 milliseconds for backend response.
Both the network-facing stages and the backend component took longer than in San Antonio. I cannot attribute the whole difference to physical distance from Chicago: redirects, network conditions, cache state, and normal variation between individual runs may also contribute.
The positive detail is that interactivity did not collapse along with the loading score. Total Blocking Time was 0 milliseconds, Cumulative Layout Shift remained 0, and Time to Interactive was 2.2 seconds. Once the page reached the visitor, it was not showing the kind of significant script blocking or jumping layout that can make a website frustrating to use. The limitation here was primarily how long it took content to arrive and render.
The European result was noticeably slower than the US run. It did not show a serious interactivity or visual-stability problem, but the 3.3-second LCP would make me cautious about using this Chicago-hosted setup for a Europe-first audience without further testing or optimization. I would examine redirects, caching or CDN options, and the final production configuration before making performance promises.
Across the two GTmetrix tests, Namecheap’s cPanel-based shared hosting handled this website well when measured from the US, but its international result was less compelling. San Antonio reached 88% Performance with a 1.7-second LCP, while Frankfurt dropped to 68% with a 3.3-second LCP.
Both locations returned a zero layout shift and almost no Total Blocking Time, so the clearest weakness was loading speed across regions rather than page responsiveness.
For a small business whose audience is concentrated in the United States, these figures are a promising starting point. For a site selling to customers in Europe or several continents, I would not rely on this Chicago-origin result alone.
Namecheap cPanel hosting and Namecheap shared hosting are exactly the same service. Namecheap sells its standard Linux cPanel hosting through the Shared Hosting page, with Stellar, Stellar Plus, and Stellar Business all using cPanel for website management.
I therefore chose the Stellar shared hosting plan for this review. My focus is the experience of signing up, managing the subscription, and working inside cPanel, rather than repeating our existing general Namecheap hosting review.
I focused on the questions a new customer would ask:
I started from Namecheap’s main navigation, where Hosting leads directly to Shared Hosting. I did not need to work through a separate “cPanel hosting” product page, which reinforces that these are the same plans sold under the shared-hosting name.
The plan page made comparison fairly easy. I could switch between monthly, yearly, and bi-yearly billing, choose a data-center region, and compare Stellar, Stellar Plus, and Stellar Business side by side.
All three displayed a 30-day free-trial option. I chose Stellar because it was the entry-level package and let me see how much of the normal hosting experience was available without upgrading. The plan card listed three websites, 20 GB SSD storage, and 30 mailboxes, along with AI website-building options.
One detail I appreciated was the separation between the trial and the paid term. The Stellar card showed $0 for 30 days and a promotional price after the trial, rather than presenting the service as permanently free. The prices changed in the later checkout summary, so the final order review mattered more than the headline price.
After selecting the trial, Namecheap asked me to connect a domain. The form initially favored registering a new domain, but it also offered an Existing domain option. I entered hostadvice.tech, which I already owned through another registrar, and Namecheap accepted it as the domain associated with the hosting order. I did not need to buy or transfer another domain to proceed.
That was convenient, but there is an important distinction for anyone using a domain that already hosts other services: associating a domain with a new hosting order does not, by itself, change its DNS records. Namecheap later displayed the nameservers that would need to be configured before the site could be reached through this hosting account.
The cart then gave me another chance to verify the plan, term, domain, and charge. My trial subtotal was $0.00. The checkout also showed $26.88 for the first annual period after the trial and a later renewal amount of $55.88 per year. Seeing both figures was useful: a free first month and an introductory annual rate do not mean the ongoing cost remains the same.
Below the selected hosting package was a long Improve Your Site section. It promoted business email, managed WordPress hosting, SEO tools, SSL, PremiumDNS, AI social tools, review management, and SiteLock protection, among other offers. Some had their own free trials, while others showed paid prices and renewals.
None of these optional services was automatically added to my order. That is a clear positive, although the number of offers makes checkout feel more commercial than it needs to be.
Next came account creation. Namecheap placed its existing-account login beside a form for new customers, so there was no need to hunt for a separate registration page. The form requested a name, email address, username, and password. The optional newsletter checkbox was initially selected; I cleared it before continuing.
This stage was not entirely frictionless. My first submission triggered a “Please prove you’re a human” message, after which a reCAPTCHA challenge appeared.
I also had to complete the account contact and billing details, including an address, telephone number, and postal code, even though the order total was $0.00. These checks are understandable, but they lengthened what initially looked like a quick free-trial registration.
At the final order review, Namecheap kept the $0.00 total, selected term, introductory and renewal amounts, billing details, and applicable terms on one page.
My payment-method summary showed Funds, and the renewal setting stated that new services would renew automatically.
I had to accept Namecheap’s terms before the Pay Now action succeeded; attempting to proceed without doing so produced a clear warning. I liked the final review, but I would have preferred a more prominent explanation of the automatic renewal setting during the earlier trial selection.
The order completed successfully with a $0.00 charge. The confirmation page identified the Stellar subscription and provided a Manage option and next-step links for setting up or uploading a website. It was a reassuring finish, even though another promotional business-startup offer appeared on the same page.
Buying Namecheap’s cPanel-based Stellar plan was straightforward, and I could use an existing domain without paying for another one. The final pricing and optional extras were sufficiently visible, and the add-ons were not preselected. The weaker points were the lengthy promotional cart, an extra CAPTCHA step, substantial contact information for a free trial, and an automatic-renewal setting that deserves attention before checkout.
Once the order was complete, I moved to Namecheap’s account area and opened Hosting List. This is where Namecheap separates account administration from the server tools inside cPanel.
The subscription table displayed the domain, plan, status, auto-renewal switch, and expiration date. I could see the new Stellar trial under hostadvice.tech without having to search through unrelated products.
The status read Expiring, with November 17, 2026 shown as the expiration date. On a newly activated 30-day trial, that wording is a little alarming at first glance. The auto-renew switch was also enabled, which made the subscription list an important place to check immediately after signing up.
A yellow notice immediately below the subscription was more useful than the sales banner above it. It instructed me to point the domain to dns1.namecheaphosting.com and dns2.namecheaphosting.com to make the site accessible.
This confirmed an important limitation of the earlier domain-connection step: the purchase had associated hostadvice.tech with the account, but the screenshots do not demonstrate that I had completed DNS setup or launched a live website there.
Namecheap also continued to promote SiteLock from the top of the Hosting List. I did not find that promotion difficult to dismiss, but it added visual noise to a page that should primarily tell customers if their hosting is active and what still needs attention.
Finding the technical control panel took one more step. The action at the right of the subscription row emphasized Renew; opening the adjacent dropdown revealed Manage and Go to cPanel. That gives experienced customers direct access without moving through several pages. For a first-time buyer, though, I would make the cPanel shortcut more obvious than a small dropdown beside a renewal button.
The account dashboard does its administrative job well: I could check the selected plan, trial end date, auto-renewal, and DNS instructions in one place. The main usability issue was presentation. A new trial was marked Expiring, a security upsell competed with the setup notice, and cPanel access was tucked behind the subscription action menu. None prevented me from reaching the tools, but each added a little unnecessary friction.
The next layer is cPanel itself. This is the part that makes Namecheap’s standard shared hosting “cPanel hosting.”
Instead of using Namecheap’s billing dashboard to manage website files or databases, customers work in a familiar cPanel interface with grouped tools and a search box at the top.
The screen I inspected was Namecheap’s customized cPanel layout. It placed Sitejet Builder and WordPress Manager by Softaculous in the left navigation, with a separate group of Namecheap-specific shortcuts near the top.
Standard cPanel sections followed underneath: Files, Email, Databases, Domains, Security, Metrics, Software, Advanced, and Preferences. It is not a minimal dashboard, but the categories at least make the breadth of tools understandable.
For everyday website management, I could quickly locate File Manager, FTP Accounts, Backup, Git Version Control, the Domains tools, Redirects, and Zone Editor. Database management was grouped around phpMyAdmin and the database creation tools.
Email Accounts, Forwarders, Email Routing, Spam Filters, and deliverability-related controls had their own section. That organization is useful because basic administration does not depend on remembering a command or navigating an unfamiliar custom interface.
Security and developer features were also visible, including SSL/TLS Certificates, Two-Factor Authentication, SSH Access, ModSecurity, IP Blocker, Cron Jobs, Terminal, and setup tools for Node.js, Python, and Ruby.
Namecheap’s customized area provided links such as Namecheap SSL and Select PHP Version. I am treating these as tools visible in the panel, not as functions I independently deployed or benchmarked for this section.
The same distinction applies to WordPress and AI website creation. Sitejet Builder, WordPress Manager, and Softaculous were easy to locate, but the screenshots supplied for this review do not show a new WordPress installation or completed Sitejet project. Their availability in the interface supports a navigation assessment, not a claim that I tested their full workflows here.
One evidence detail is important: the cPanel screenshot identifies 2test.website as its primary domain, whereas the newly purchased Stellar trial was associated with hostadvice.tech. I therefore use this screen to assess Namecheap’s cPanel layout and tool visibility, not as proof that hostadvice.tech was fully deployed on the trial server.
My main criticism is density. There are many icons, several routes to similar functions, and a mix of Namecheap-specific shortcuts with standard cPanel utilities. The search bar helps when you already know what you need, but a first-time site owner may still have to understand terms such as phpMyAdmin, DNS Zone Editor, and SSH before using them confidently. The payoff is that the interface offers more direct control than a simplified, single-purpose website builder.
Namecheap’s cPanel is practical for anyone who wants conventional shared-hosting controls without a proprietary learning curve. Common file, domain, email, database, and security tools are easy to locate once you know their categories. The interface is less welcoming to complete beginners, and the supplied screenshots confirm the tools’ presence rather than the success of individual deployments.
Namecheap makes the purchasing side of cPanel hosting relatively easy. I could identify the correct shared-hosting product, select an entry-level plan, use an existing domain, decline optional extras, and finish a $0 trial order with renewal prices available for review. The account dashboard then gave me visibility into the subscription and the DNS work still required.
The experience becomes less seamless after purchase. Automatic renewal deserves close attention, the Hosting List presents a fresh trial as Expiring, cPanel access is less prominent than it could be, and the technical panel contains a large number of tools.
For someone comfortable with traditional shared hosting, that is a reasonable trade-off for control. For someone buying hosting for the first time, I would expect a short adjustment period rather than a completely guided setup.
Support matters most when an instruction could interrupt a live website. Namecheap advertises round-the-clock assistance, but I wanted to judge more than availability. I looked at how quickly someone answered, how easy it was to reach a human, how well the team handled an existing DNS setup, and whether the documentation could support the advice.
Namecheap offers the following support channels:
There is no telephone support. For this review, I tested live chat and the knowledgebase; I did not submit a separate ticket or measure email response times.
I started from Namecheap’s support area, where the knowledgebase includes a Go to Live Chat page button. Rather than ask about a hypothetical problem, I used the domain attached to my new Stellar trial.
My dashboard wanted me to change its nameservers, but hostadvice.tech was already serving other services and subdomains. I wanted to preview Namecheap hosting first without disturbing the existing setup.
I opened the conversation on October 19, 2026, at 1:15 PM. The first responder, Suzy Q, joined almost immediately and provided a detailed answer 22 seconds after my initial message.
The guidance was genuinely useful. Suzy explained that Namecheap disables the familiar cPanel temporary URL format on shared hosting for security reasons, then offered two alternatives: make a local hosts-file override so only my computer sees the new server, or create a test subdomain and point its A record to the Namecheap server.
The response also linked directly to the relevant knowledgebase article. That addressed my original requirement far better than simply telling me to change nameservers.
The response had the speed and structured detail often associated with automated first-line assistance, although the transcript itself does not explicitly identify Suzy Q as an AI bot. I would not treat the first answer as proof that a human reviewed the account.
Next, I explicitly requested a human technical support agent. Suzy acknowledged the request after 17 seconds, and Gokulakannan M. joined 25 seconds after I asked for a transfer. His first greeting arrived 33 seconds after the request. There was no refusal or lengthy series of prompts to get through, which made the handoff feel straightforward.
The transition was not completely seamless, though. Gokul asked for five to ten minutes to review the previous conversation, and I repeated the domain situation and the specific technical question. Suzy had said the details would be passed along, but the exchange did not show the new agent picking up the full problem without another explanation.
My follow-up was more precise: could I keep DNS with the current provider and update only the necessary records to use Namecheap, without interrupting the other services? Gokul asked for time to check and returned the first technical answer six minutes and 30 seconds after that question.
He supplied the server IP associated with my hosting account and instructed me to update the domain’s A record. Two minutes and 14 seconds later, he added that DNS propagation might take 30 to 60 minutes.
This was partly the right answer. Namecheap’s documentation confirms that you can keep the existing nameservers and point the website through an A record. Giving me the account-specific destination IP was more useful than a generic reply.
The problem was what the answer left out: it did not distinguish testing from making the live change, explain that an apex A-record update redirects real website visitors, discuss the www record, or tell me what to check before changing records used by email and existing subdomains.
Those omissions matter because I had explicitly asked how to avoid disruption. Keeping nameservers unchanged is not the same as leaving live traffic unchanged. A careful answer would have separated a safe preview using the hosts file or a test subdomain from the later cutover and explained which existing DNS records should be preserved. I did not actually change DNS during this support test, so I am assessing the advice, not claiming it produced a successful migration.
The first response and human handoff were quick, and the agent was courteous. I particularly liked the initial explanation of how to preview hosting without changing the live domain.
The human reply was less convincing: it supplied a correct, account-specific A-record instruction but did not fully answer the risk-management part of my question. I would call this accessible support with uneven technical depth, rather than a completely resolved case.
After testing live chat, I turned to Namecheap’s knowledgebase to see how useful it would be without an agent. The Help Center links to a dedicated Knowledgebase page with a search bar, clearly named product categories, recent articles, and frequently asked questions.
Hosting was visible among the categories on the first screen, alongside Domains, SSL Certificates, Email service, and account-related topics. I could start browsing without having to guess an exact search phrase.
I selected Hosting from that category list. This opened a much more detailed index rather than dropping me into a generic search-results page. Hosting was expanded in the left sidebar, while the main area divided documentation into labeled sections such as Getting Started, Hosting Information, cPanel questions, DNS settings, SSL installation, FTP, MySQL, WordPress, migrations, and PHP configuration. Under each section I could scan article titles or open the full section.
The organization felt practical. If I already knew my question concerned DNS or cPanel, I could head directly to that group.
The drawback was the length of the page: with so many subcategories and article links, it felt more like a technical reference directory than a simple getting-started guide. The search box remained visible near the top, which would be the quicker route for a specific error or setting.
I then opened a specific article to judge the instructions themselves: “How to change the time zone in cPanel Webmail.” This was a useful spot check because it involved a real setting, not a broad marketing explanation.
The page identified its last update as September 12, 2023, and then gave a short, numbered sequence: sign in to Webmail, open Settings, go to Preferences and User Interface, choose the time zone, and save.
The screenshots were the strongest part. They showed the Webmail interface at each stage, with arrows and numbered markers pointing to the controls. I could follow the intended clicks without already knowing the interface. The guide also explained that the hosting server uses an EST/EDT time zone, providing a reason someone might want to change the setting.
I liked that the article stayed focused on one task instead of burying the answer under unrelated product information. However, it was fairly minimal: there was no troubleshooting advice if the menu looked different or the saved setting did not take effect.
The visible update date is helpful for judging how recently a guide was revised, although I did not independently carry out this Webmail change. This was a review of clarity and presentation, not confirmation that every instruction still works in every account.
The knowledgebase was easy to enter and logically categorized, and the Webmail article demonstrated clear, image-led instructions. The long Hosting index takes some scanning, and individual articles could offer more troubleshooting context, but I found it a useful first stop for common cPanel questions. The article linked during chat also showed how support can direct customers toward self-service material.
Namecheap performed well on accessibility. The initial answer arrived in 22 seconds, a human joined 25 seconds after I requested one, and the agent eventually supplied the account-specific server IP. I did not have to hunt for a contact method or fight through multiple handoffs.
However, quick access did not guarantee a complete technical answer. The human agent needed several minutes and did not fully explain how to avoid disrupting existing services. The knowledgebase complemented chat well: its Hosting index made common subjects easy to locate, and the Webmail example had clear annotated instructions. I would use both resources together, but ask for explicit confirmation before changing DNS records on an active domain
Yes, for individuals and small businesses that want affordable, conventional shared hosting with cPanel, domain email, and familiar website-management tools. My Stellar signup was straightforward, and the US speed test was encouraging. I also appreciated reaching a human support agent quickly.
The trade-offs are real. The European test was noticeably slower, the purchase flow included many optional offers, and human DNS guidance missed details relevant to an existing live domain.
I would recommend Namecheap most confidently for a primarily US audience and for owners comfortable with cPanel. If international speed is central to your business, benchmark your own site before committing.
| Název plánu | Prostor | Šířka pásma | OS | Panel | Počet webových stránek | Cena | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Free Trial | Neomezený | Neomezený | Neomezený | 0 Kč | Podrobnosti | ||
| Stellar | 20 GB | Neomezený | cPanel | 3 | 50 Kč | Podrobnosti | |
| Stellar Plus | Neomezený | Neomezený | cPanel | Neomezený | 70 Kč | Podrobnosti | |
| Stellar Business | 50 GB | Neomezený | cPanel | Neomezený | 120 Kč | Podrobnosti |
| Description | Expert Review |
|---|---|
| Dostupný sdílený hosting se spolehlivým výkonem a jednoduchými nástroji pro sp... | Read Shared Hosting Review |
| Read Email Hosting Review | |
| Optimalizovaný hosting pro WordPress s vysokými rychlostmi, vylepšeným zabezpeče... | Read Wordpress Hosting Review |
| Škálovatelný VPS hosting s vyhrazenými prostředky a plným root přístupem | Read VPS Review |
| Výkonné dedikované servery s plnou kontrolou, přizpůsobením a vysokým výkonem... | Read Dedicated Server Review |
| Škálovatelný hosting pro prodejce s možnostmi white-label a flexibilními plány. | Read Reseller Hosting Review |
| Read Domain Registration Review | |
| Read Namecheap MCP Review | |
| Read CDN Review | |
| Read PremiumDNS Review | |
| Read AI Website Builder Review | |
| Read API Review |
Yes. Namecheap’s Stellar, Stellar Plus, and Stellar Business shared hosting plans include cPanel. They are the standard cPanel hosting products.
Yes. Eligible shared hosting customers can try the service free for 30 days, subject to Namecheap’s trial limits and renewal terms.
Stellar allows up to three websites. Stellar Plus and Stellar Business advertise unlimited websites, subject to their usage policies.
Yes. Namecheap provides WordPress installation through Softaculous in cPanel. You can also manage website files and databases directly.
Yes, eligible first-time customers who purchase without a 30-day trial can request a refund within 30 days. Trial customers and certain extras are excluded.
Odpovězte na pár jednoduchých otázek a najděte pro vás perfektní řešení!
Začít s vyhledáváním hostingu
HostAdvice.com poskytuje profesionální recenze hostingu nezávislé na jakémkoliv jiném subjektu. Naše recenze jsou objektivní, čestné a uplatňují stejná hodnotící kritéria pro všechny.
Peněžní odměna je přijímána od hodnocených společností. Kompenzace služeb a produktů nemá žádný vliv na směr nebo závěry našich recenzí. Ani neovlivňuje pořadí některých hostitelských společností.
Podpořte komunitu vlastníků internetových stránek přidáním vaší objektivní recenze vašeho hostitele stránek.
