Head to head

beacondb.net vs rrpicturearchives.net

rrpicturearchives.net is more readable to AI, 72 against 66 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.

beacondb.net 66/10066beacondb.net

Scanned 6 hours ago · full report

rrpicturearchives.net 72/10072rrpicturearchives.net

Scanned 6 hours ago · full report

Where the difference is by dimension

Dimensionbeacondb.netrrpicturearchives.net
Reach
Whether AI crawlers and answer-engine fetchers are permitted to request the page at all. What h…
39 / 4039 / 40
Readability
Whether a fetcher that does not execute JavaScript receives the actual content, in markup an ex…
19 / 2522 / 25
Structure
Machine-readable markup that states the page's type, entities, canonical URL, and discrete fact…
4 / 206 / 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

Measurementbeacondb.netrrpicturearchives.net
Answer engines blocked00
Training crawlers blocked02
Refuses AI agents at the edgenono
Words of text without JavaScript5761,274
Structured datanono
Sitemapnoyes
llms.txtnono

beacondb.net blocks no tracked AI crawler in robots.txt.

rrpicturearchives.net blocks Amazonbot, Meta-ExternalAgent.

Compare your own site

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