Head to head

rt-solar.ru vs fa.ru

rt-solar.ru is more readable to AI, 77 against 75 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.

rt-solar.ru 77/10077rt-solar.ru

Scanned 3 hours ago · full report

fa.ru 75/10075fa.ru

Scanned 3 hours ago · full report

Where the difference is by dimension

Dimensionrt-solar.rufa.ru
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…
22 / 2524 / 25
Structure
Machine-readable markup that states the page's type, entities, canonical URL, and discrete fact…
9 / 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

Measurementrt-solar.rufa.ru
Answer engines blocked00
Training crawlers blocked00
Refuses AI agents at the edgenono
Words of text without JavaScript7491,761
Structured datanono
Sitemapyesyes
llms.txtnono

rt-solar.ru blocks no tracked AI crawler in robots.txt.

fa.ru 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.