If I were to ask you: Where do you usually go when looking to read web focused news and social media related stories and tips? The answer would probably be one of three: Mashable, TechCrunch or both!
In our first TechCrunch vs. Mashable review post, we compared and contrasted TechCrunch and Mashable in terms of general stats, interface & reviews. Here in part 2, we will be comparing these two sites in terms of Alexa and Quantcast stats and quality and type of content.
Mashable vs. TechCrunch on Alexa:
Through a short Alexa search, we were able to deduce the following differences between the two hard-headed opponents: Mashable & TechCrunch. Take a look:
With only a month’s head start for TechCrunch in 2005, it is undeniable that the competition is, and has been, overwhelming for our two “weblogs”!
Both sites seem to have slow load times, where Mashable.com needs 16.1 seconds to load (99% of sites are faster according to Alexa) and TechCrunch.com needs 9.0 seconds to load (with 94% of sites are faster).
Mashable vs. TechCrunch on Quantcast:
By now, and after all other comparisons done before, we do realize that the competition is tight when it comes to Mashable and TechCrunch. Quantcast shows a different side to the comparison by allowing us to compare the sites addicts, regulars and passers-by.
According to Quantcast, fewer than 1 percent of Mashable’s visitors are addicts (30 or more visits per month) and those addicts are responsible for 6 percent of the visits. Twenty-two percent are regulars (2-30 visits per month) and those users are responsible for 47 percent of the visits. Seventy-eight percent are passers-by (only one visit in 30 days) and they are responsible for 47 percent of the visits.
As for TechCrunch, the data is slightly different. Fewer than 1 percent of TechCrunch visitors are addicts (30 or more visits per month) but they are responsible for 23% of all visits to the site. Thirty-two percent are regulars (2-30 visits per month) and they are responsible for 51 percent of visits to the site. Sixty-eight percent are passers-by (only one visit in 30 days) and they are responsible for 26 percent of visits to the site.
What we can deduce from these numbers is that TechCrunch seem to have more regulars and more active addicts than Mashable. But both sites have a large number of just passers-by.
Mashable vs. TechCrunch Content:
Through yet another humble research, I came across an article dated back to 2008 accusing Mashable and TechCrunch of degrading content quality. The article went on to say that there seems to exist “a combination of thoughtless articles and copycat posts” on both of the aforementioned blogs.
But is that all one can say about these giants’ content? I guess not.
Looking back at Alexa stats, we were able to see that TechCrunch leads in terms of higher traffic. It seems to me that this is attributed to the type of content that is usually published there as opposed to that published on Mashable!
Although “Mashable do a lot of list posts when Techcrunch does none or very few, Techcrunch have more depth in their coverage”.
Moreover, Mashable seems to be very good at posting useful tips and articles for search marketers and developers in addition to:
- Having solid content with minimum criticism.
- Posting lots of search engine-friendly “how-tos.”
- The weekly social media and web events guide series.
As for TechCrunch, they seem to place a great amount of emphasis on the depth of their articles as opposed to the velocity. This means, in simple terms, that TechCrunch usually have longer, more detailed and less diversified content, which is mostly based to research, opinions and proof.
Despite our personal preferences and which site we regard as our “every day cup of tea – or coffee”, overall statistics strongly prove that both sites are closely matched. But, at least for the time being, TechCrunch is taking the lead in this Tango dance for Web power!
Yet, the question remains to be: Are stats alone enough to give the “exact” overall opinion of site visitors and loyalists? Is there a possibility that numbers were manipulated? And what do you think Mashable can do more to elevate its current status and be the tortoise who beat the rabbit?
Looking forward to hearing your thoughts on our analysis below :)