Putting Alexa Rank to the Test
- Posted by B Jones on June 29th, 2007 - Comment on this Post »
Alexa rank. We all know it’s totally unreliable as an accurate ranking for websites, but for some reason, we still keep checking it. Well, at least I do.
Today, I was trying to explain to someone why Alexa rank is so unreliable. It didn’t seem like they were quite getting it, so I thought I’d try this.
I took the statcounter stats for 19 sites, and compared those numbers with the Alexa rank for each of those sites. The results were pretty much what I expected, and also what I’ve seen when comparing my own sites traffic stats with alexa ranks.
(Remember, with Alexa Rank, lower is better)
| Site | Pageloads (per month) | Unique Visits (per month) |
Alexa Rank |
Site Type |
| swansea.info | 4,193 | 1,517 | 1,093,097 | local/ travel |
| ferrao.org | 12,322 | 4,100 | 7,307,702 | News Blog |
| labitacora.net | 14,469 | 9,663 | 652,472 | Blog |
| kottu.org | 21,378 | 11,595 | 1,168,943 | Blog |
| igrice.hr | 59,097 | 22,482 | 391,457 | Gaming |
| tolkienlibrary.com | 61,701 | 25,615 | 384,627 | Books |
| liberalavenger.com | 56,453 | 27,987 | 701,743 | News/ Politics blog |
| claysbamapage.net | 65,559 | 39,846 | 685,256 | Football |
| seologs.com | 150,243 | 50,665 | 9,921 | SEO/ SEM |
| pixelperfectdigital.com | 256,571 | 74,608 | 125,565 | Photography/ Design |
| versosperfectos.com | 436,716 | 98,814 | 78,620 | Music |
| militantplatypus.com | 712,886 | 144,355 | 130,692 | Photography/ Design |
| eclipse-plugins.2y.net | 450,307 | 159,205 | 33,404 | Programming |
| poea.gov.ph | 639,658 | 202,965 | 50,306 | Govt |
| emezeta.com | 649,052 | 405,382 | 25,312 | tech blog, espanol |
| osx-e.com | 3,518,005 | 830,437 | 62,039 | Mac |
| microsiervos.com | 2,496,956 | 1,452,791 | 6,040 | Computer science |
| blogadorn.com | 13,403,525 | 1,713,931 | 52,704 | Clip Art for Myspace |
| javimoya.com | 18,075,839 | 7,848,084 | 2,098 | youtube downloader |
One of the best examples of skewed Alexa data, happens to be this site. It’s ranked under 10,000, while sites that get more traffic are ranked over 100,000. This is because so many more SEO folks have the Alexa toolbar tracker installed in their browsers, in the form of firefox extensions and regular toolbars. Those people visit tech/ web/ marketing related sites (like seologs.com) way more than they visit other kinds of sites.
Don’t get me wrong here. I still think Alexa is a really useful service. Especially when comparing really similar sites. It’s just good to be aware of this flaw.
If you’re wondering how I got access to the stats for these 19 sites, see this post about how to view public stats for thousands of sites. Also, if anyone else wants to share any real stats along with your Alexa rank, please do.
July 10th, 2007 at 8:48 pm
Please add this stats to your list. I just looked up the stats on Google Analytics.
Site: topwebhosts.org
Page Views (per month): 13,805 (2.49/visit)
Unique Visits: 5,555
Alexa Ranking: 1,136,869
Site Type: Web Hosting Resource
This site used to have Alexa ranking of ~760,000 (w/ similar stats), but the rank dropped significantly (~1.5M) when we had a few occurances of downtime. It’s gradually coming back up.
July 17th, 2007 at 8:04 am
Wow that’s real bad websitespam in your comment there… *sigh
July 18th, 2007 at 12:22 am
Could be, but at least it’s on topic.
August 3rd, 2007 at 12:42 am
I can say that its skewed toward sites that get a lot of internet saavy folks - simply because those are more likely to be running the toolbar. Others said that if you but the button on your site - then it would make it more accurate. However we ran it on the site for 1 month and the rank didn’t change for the better - it actually went from about 34k to 36k.
August 21st, 2007 at 10:38 am
I heard that Alexa toolbar are huge in Korea. Many people use it like we use Google. It would be interesting to track some Korean websites.
August 21st, 2007 at 10:40 am
Just ignore SEO sites and everything will be ok with Alexa.
By the way, is it true that Alexa has agreement with other companies to track stat through their toolbars???
September 5th, 2007 at 1:09 pm
This was a very interesting and enlightening article. But I must admit, that reading through the table was not nearly as useful as plotting the data onto a chart… so that’s exactly what I did. I think this might merit another article. Take a look.
I plotted the Unique Visits per Month (the blue area) and 1/Alexa Rank (the pink line), both on logarithmic scales. Is there a correlation?
http://i85.photobucket.com/albums/k41/alexainternet/alexa.gif
Clearly. In fact it is pretty remarkable. I wasn’t sure what to expect, but this is a very good result.
But, surely the other free traffic estimation services must be better, right? After all, your article implies that Alexa isn’t that good. Let’s check.
First, compete.com
http://i85.photobucket.com/albums/k41/alexainternet/compete.gif
Ooooffff. Not good. 5 of the 19 sites don’t have any data at all. And the remaining sites… might as well be random. They don’t correlate at all. So much for “real science.”
What about Quantcast?
http://i85.photobucket.com/albums/k41/alexainternet/quantcast.gif
OMG, that is even worse than compete. They don’t have any data for half of the sites. And the remaining sites that they actually have tracked? Why bother?
What I take away from this exercise is this: Doing traffic estimation is hard. Most services do a lousy job at it. But Alexa is head and shoulders above the rest.
October 3rd, 2007 at 8:57 pm
Who cares alexa ? you and me
www.baktabul.com is having 22,888 and having daily unique visitors of 40,000-45,000 only and yet still are we have good Alexa Traffic Rank?
October 5th, 2007 at 3:37 pm
Good info, excellent the sites comparison. It give me something to think about.
Good posting
Eric
www.egsmartsys.com
October 22nd, 2007 at 1:24 am
The sad part is, Alexa’s no better when comparing Apples and Apples - www.seomoz.org/article/search-blog-stats - you can see there how even inside a very limited set of sites that should be pulling very similar types of traffic, Alexa isn’t even useful in predicting any correlation whatsoever.
October 23rd, 2007 at 6:29 am
>www.seomoz.org/article/search-blog-stats
Very interesting. Wow. I actually tied putting them in a table, and looking at Alexa rank vis average monthly visits, and really wasn’t able to. It was a lot better than the random sites I used, but overall, I really couldn’t do it.
Here it is. (added July/Sept average for SEOlogs just for more data)
Thanks for that.
October 25th, 2007 at 6:20 am
I think Alexa is useful for sites you don’t know at all so at least you find out whether the site has some decent traffic or not but comparing sites with Alexa is quite useless
October 25th, 2007 at 4:15 pm
Hello! Yes the Alexa data is not representative, but still somewhat comparable across similar niches. It’s also likely that there’s a much higher percentage in toolbar installations in the USA as compared to Europe. I heard Asians are crazy about Alexa. Best use is probably to derive trends from those figures. My humbly 2 cents. -John
October 31st, 2007 at 4:06 am
My website http://www.fortunehotels.in isn’t having good position in Alexa. I have downloaded alexa toolbar & widgets on the website but no result. Even I read on many sites that alexa widget, redirections are myth. Is that true? I need your feedbacks.
October 31st, 2007 at 7:38 am
You need to get firefox, and install something like the SearchStatus plugin.