history.com vs si.edu
Market traction comparison · Updated Jul 2026
| history.com | si.edu | Leads | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Monthly Visits | 5.2M | 6.2M | si.edu |
| Bounce Rate | 58.8% | 53.6% | si.edu |
| SEO & Keywords | 30 | 30 | Tie |
| Domain Age | 31y 10m | — |
si.edu leads in 2 of 3 dimensions, while history.com leads in 0.
Growth Momentum
| history.com | si.edu | Leads | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Monthly Visits | 5.2M | 6.2M | si.edu |
| MoM Change | +4% | +15% | si.edu |
| Avg. Session | 1m30s | 2m04s | si.edu |
| Pages / Visit | 2.0 | 3.6 | si.edu |
Growth Momentum · Insight
si.edu is growing +15% while history.com grows +4%. At current trajectory, si.edu could close the traffic gap within 1 months.
Acquisition Strategy
| history.com | si.edu | Leads | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Primary Channel | Search 52% | Search 60% | |
| Bounce Rate | 58.8% | 53.6% | si.edu |
| SEO & Keywords | 30 | 30 | — |
Keyword Overlap Rate: 7%
| Keyword | Volume | history.com | si.edu |
|---|---|---|---|
| may day | 13.4K | #6 | #10 |
Acquisition Strategy · Insight
history.com acquires users primarily through Search (52%), while si.edu relies on Search (60%). This reflects fundamentally different go-to-market strategies — history.com's higher direct traffic suggests stronger brand recognition or product-led growth, while si.edu's search reliance means growth is more scalable but more vulnerable to algorithm changes.
Business Maturity
| history.com | si.edu | Leads | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Domain Age | 31y 10m | — | |
| Registered | Oct 1994 | — | |
| Expires | Oct 2026 | — |
Market Position
| history.com | si.edu | Leads | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Global Rank | #13.9K | #9.0K | si.edu |
| Category Rank | #109 | #6 | si.edu |
history.com only
si.edu only
Market Position · Insight
Each has untapped markets the other serves: history.com could expand into United Kingdom, while si.edu could target Philippines.
Key Takeaways
- •si.edu is growing +15% while history.com grows +4%. At current trajectory, si.edu could close the traffic gap within 1 months.
- •history.com acquires users primarily through Search (52%), while si.edu relies on Search (60%). This reflects fundamentally different go-to-market strategies — history.com's higher direct traffic suggests stronger brand recognition or product-led growth, while si.edu's search reliance means growth is more scalable but more vulnerable to algorithm changes.
- •Both are growing, with si.edu accelerating faster at +15% vs +4%.
- •With only 7% keyword overlap, they target largely different search audiences.
You've seen the gap. Now steal the playbook.
A Growth Teardown reverse-engineers exactly how each product grows — traffic sources, backlink strategy, keyword gaps, and scored action items you can copy this week.
Related Comparisons
Report based on data from July 2026