Head to head

sacred-texts.com vs makeagif.com

sacred-texts.com is more readable to AI, 76 against 71 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.

sacred-texts.com 76/10076sacred-texts.com

Scanned 20 hours ago · full report

makeagif.com 71/10071makeagif.com

Scanned 22 hours ago · full report

Where the difference is by dimension

Dimensionsacred-texts.commakeagif.com
Reach
Whether AI crawlers and answer-engine fetchers are permitted to request the page at all. What h…
30 / 4040 / 40
Readability
Whether a fetcher that does not execute JavaScript receives the actual content, in markup an ex…
18 / 2519 / 25
Structure
Machine-readable markup that states the page's type, entities, canonical URL, and discrete fact…
20 / 208 / 20
Attribution
Signals that let an answer engine name the author, date the content, resolve the publisher, and…
4 / 151 / 15

The measurements side by side

Measurementsacred-texts.commakeagif.com
Answer engines blocked00
Training crawlers blocked80
Refuses AI agents at the edgeyesno
Words of text without JavaScript398320
Structured datayesno
Sitemapyesyes
llms.txtnono

sacred-texts.com blocks Amazonbot, Applebot-Extended, Bytespider, CCBot, ClaudeBot, Google-Extended, GPTBot, Meta-ExternalAgent, SemrushBot-OCOB.

makeagif.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.