"We learn something every

Charles — Tue, 02 Sep 2008 18:02:11 -0700

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

Check the dates: Quantcast:

Charles — Tue, 02 Sep 2008 17:24:30 -0700

Check the dates:

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

Alexa shows a slight

Cyndy Aleo-Carreira509894 — Thu, 28 Aug 2008 10:34:44 -0700

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.

There's one way to read

Charles — Wed, 27 Aug 2008 11:52:36 -0700

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.

There are lies, damn lies, and Web stats

Cyndy Aleo-Carreira — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 10:13:18 -0700

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:

Compete stats for KillerStartups vs. CrunchBase:

Google Trends stats for KillerStartups vs. Crunchbase:

Quantcast stats for KillerStartups vs. CrunchBase:

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

Analysis: An insider's view of Web advertising, from autos to remnant networks
News: The New York Times looks to B2B for better CPMs
News: Briefly: Ad network use rises 600% as companies fill remnant space
News: Internet measurement in China: How to get out of the Dark Ages

The Industry Standard - There are lies, damn lies, and Web stats - Comments

http://siteanalytics.compete.

"We learn something every

Check the dates: Quantcast:

Alexa shows a slight

There's one way to read

There are lies, damn lies, and Web stats