« Back to the top page
Cyndy Aleo-Carreira
Like the story? Get Alerts of big news events. Enter your email address

Does anyone really believe Web stats sites any more? Last week, I posted a quick write-up of some negative data about KillerStartups that David Knight at The Knight Knetwork had noticed. The KillerStartups marketing team, went on the defensive, both in the comments below the Knight post as well as via email. The evidence that Knight's analysis was wrong? Quantcast.

To be fair, Quantcast does break out the global vs. U.S. numbers for KillerStartups, and seems to update frequently, something that Alexa fails to do on a regular basis and the free version of Compete does only once per month, at month-end. Still, the metrics behind Web stats have variables which can throw off measurement. Last fall, Jeremy Schoemaker, better known in Web marketing circles as Shoemoney, noted that even running the Quantcast widget on his site, the stats were so far off as to be completely unusable. Others have reported similar discrepancies for their sites across the board, with no service showing the same numbers as raw logs generated by stats trackers running directly on the service.

Any Web administrator knows how off numbers can be depending on how the software tracking them is configured. Are images tracked separately as pageviews? Does the "unique visitors" number include sites hitting yours for those same graphics? Are spiders separated out or are they included in stats?

But considering the CPM model of content monetization, companies live and die by how they are viewed. Web stats need a standardized metric. I'm a firm believer that nothing counts other than raw server logs. Web stats services are nothing more than an overview of trends, and the trends (even on Quantcast) show a steep drop in KillerStartups' traffic, no matter which service you use to measure it. Whether Crunchbase plays a part in that drop or not, and whether the site is rebounding or not remains to be seen, but picking and choosing the best of the worst in traffic monitoring is a game everyone seems to be playing.

Alexa stats for KillerStartups vs. Crunchbase:

Alexa graph showing KillerStartups vs. Crunchbase

 

Compete stats for KillerStartups vs. CrunchBase:

Compete graph for KillerStartups vs. Crunchbase

 

Google Trends stats for KillerStartups vs. Crunchbase:

Google Trends chart for KillerStartups vs. CrunchBase

Quantcast stats for KillerStartups vs. CrunchBase:

Quantcast graph for KillerStartups vs. Crunchbase

More news, commentary, and predictions from The Industry Standard:


Comments

There's one way to read those statistics only. Quantcast and Alexa are updated (they show August), and Compete and Google trends only show July. You don't need to be a rocket scientist to see that.


Alexa shows a slight rebound, but nowhere near what Quantcast shows. And, as Roger Kondrat noticed, Quantcast seems to use Google Analytics for their OWN site:

http://www.techwinter.com/2008/08/12/quantcast-irony/

It's not exactly something that inspires confidence, is it?

When it comes to stats, I'm still old school and I don't tend to trust anything that's not actually running on my server.


Check the dates:

Quantcast: 8/21
Alexa: 8/23
Google Trends: July
Compete: July


"We learn something every day, and lots of times it's that what we learned the day before was wrong."
Bill Vaughan


Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
Respectful debate is welcome, but comments that are defamatory, indecent, abusive, or in violation of any law will be removed.