Head to head

badische-zeitung.de vs foodsharing.de

foodsharing.de is more readable to AI, 57 against 56 out of 100. Both were measured with the same audit: robots.txt policy for 48 AI agents, live requests under four crawler user agents, and a JavaScript-free read of the homepage.

badische-zeitung.de 56/10056badische-zeitung.de

Scanned 18 hours ago · full report

foodsharing.de 57/10057foodsharing.de

Scanned 18 hours ago · full report

Where the difference is by dimension

Dimensionbadische-zeitung.defoodsharing.de
Reach
Whether AI crawlers and answer-engine fetchers are permitted to request the page at all. What h…
21 / 4040 / 40
Readability
Whether a fetcher that does not execute JavaScript receives the actual content, in markup an ex…
22 / 259 / 25
Structure
Machine-readable markup that states the page's type, entities, canonical URL, and discrete fact…
9 / 203 / 20
Attribution
Signals that let an answer engine name the author, date the content, resolve the publisher, and…
1 / 151 / 15

The measurements side by side

Measurementbadische-zeitung.defoodsharing.de
Answer engines blocked60
Training crawlers blocked70
Refuses AI agents at the edgeyesno
Words of text without JavaScript4,4554
Structured datanono
Sitemapyesno
llms.txtnono

badische-zeitung.de blocks Amazonbot, Applebot-Extended, Bytespider, CCBot, ChatGPT-User, Claude-User, ClaudeBot, cohere-ai, DuckAssistBot, Google-Extended, GPTBot, Meta-ExternalAgent, Perplexity-User, PerplexityBot.

foodsharing.de blocks no tracked AI crawler in robots.txt.

Compare your own site

Free, no account. To watch a competitor and get an email when their crawler policy changes, see pricing.