Head to head

lucky-satta.com vs worldofbooks.com

worldofbooks.com is more readable to AI, 90 against 74 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.

lucky-satta.com 74/10074lucky-satta.com

Scanned 17 minutes ago · full report

worldofbooks.com 90/10090worldofbooks.com

Scanned 17 minutes ago · full report

Where the difference is by dimension

Dimensionlucky-satta.comworldofbooks.com
Reach
Whether AI crawlers and answer-engine fetchers are permitted to request the page at all. What h…
40 / 4040 / 40
Readability
Whether a fetcher that does not execute JavaScript receives the actual content, in markup an ex…
17 / 2519 / 25
Structure
Machine-readable markup that states the page's type, entities, canonical URL, and discrete fact…
9 / 2020 / 20
Attribution
Signals that let an answer engine name the author, date the content, resolve the publisher, and…
3 / 156 / 15

The measurements side by side

Measurementlucky-satta.comworldofbooks.com
Answer engines blocked00
Training crawlers blocked00
Refuses AI agents at the edgenono
Words of text without JavaScript2,9481,612
Structured datanoyes
Sitemapyesyes
llms.txtyesyes

lucky-satta.com blocks no tracked AI crawler in robots.txt.

worldofbooks.com 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.