100% uptime is an unrealistical claim. There are so many things that can go wrong with a VPS (that is, by design, only ever running on one node at the time). The probability of that node failing or a messed up route taking offline all routers at once is low, but it's not 0%.

In order to even come close to 100%, you need a multi-region distributed system and even then, so many things can go wrong.

Look at their outage credits (https://www.vultr.com/sla/) if you want to get realistical percentages.

Even Google Cloud Platform - which has multiple layers of redundancy at every level - does not claim 100% uptime: https://cloud.google.com/compute/sla

Disclaimer: I work for a competitor who would never advertise 100% uptime - it's a known fact that shit happens

I totally agree with this, after all is common sense. Even if all the hardware were perfect, and all the software were bugless, you would still have to deal with physics and with those imperfect and error-prone machines that set up all the things called humans.

Anecdatum inbound:

Sometimes they'll reboot my instance due to host errors they claim, seems to be an automated email.

Last one was January 17, before that was Dec 16, before that was Oct 29, then Oct 22

Each time the instance in question was down for less than a minute, no credit was issued.

I have instances in Sydney, Los Angeles and New Jersey

I've had one instance of network downtime lasting 40 minutes in December which was SLA refunded. No incidents since then.

Same thing, I had one VM restarted by them three times within a year.

Recently they had downtime in Amsterdam for at least an hour.

I like them, but if reliability is important they're not my first option.

Do you have any preference when it comes to reliability?

Used about 10 Vultr servers for 2 years. Had a problem with one of them once. Pretty damn good if you ask me.