CDN Adoption in Runet 2026
Q1 2026: 42% of Runet sites use a CDN (+8 pp YoY). Top: Cloudflare 71% of CDN users, Selectel CDN 8%, Fastly 6%, AWS CloudFront 5%, in-house CDN 4%, Akamai 3%. Average TTFB reduction after enabling — from 420 ms to 180 ms (-57%). For RU audience, the key factor is an MSK PoP (top-3 all have one).
Methodology
Analysis via Enterno.io PageSpeed + IP checker. Sample of ~50K unique domains with RU traffic. CDN detection by: (1) PTR-record hostname, (2) Server header, (3) ASN (Cloudflare AS13335, Fastly AS54113 etc), (4) HTTP headers (CF-Ray, X-Amz-*).
Distribution by provider (of 42% with CDN)
| CDN | Share | MSK PoP |
|---|---|---|
| Cloudflare | 71% | ✅ |
| Selectel | 8% | ✅ (RU-only) |
| Fastly | 6% | ✅ |
| AWS CloudFront | 5% | ❌ (SE/DE closer) |
| In-house | 4% | varies |
| Akamai | 3% | ✅ |
| Others | 3% | — |
TTFB impact
TTFB measurements on 1000 domains before/after CDN:
- Without CDN: median TTFB 420 ms (p75 — 780 ms)
- With CDN (cold cache): 240 ms (p75 — 350 ms)
- With CDN (HIT): 80 ms (p75 — 150 ms)
Average savings — 240 ms, boosting PageSpeed score by 15-25% and materially improving Core Web Vitals (LCP).
Why 58% of Runet sites still have no CDN
- Legacy hosting — shared hosting with ISPmanager panels without easy CDN integration.
- Cost — common misconception that CDN is expensive. Cloudflare Free plan covers 90% of use cases.
- Unclear ROI — no TTFB/CWV metrics to compare before/after.
- Regional constraints — sanctions risk for AWS/certain EU CDNs.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is data current?
Q1 2026. Updated quarterly.
Can I cite this?
Yes, with attribution to Enterno.io.