jstor.org vs tamu.edu

Market traction comparison · Updated Jul 2026

jstor.org faviconjstor.org
VS
tamu.edu favicontamu.edu
 jstor.orgtamu.eduLeads
Monthly Visits9.4M6.2Mjstor.org
Bounce Rate47.2%36.2%tamu.edu
SEO & Keywords3030Tie
Domain Age30y 6m

jstor.org leads in 1 of 3 dimensions, while tamu.edu leads in 1.

Growth Momentum

Growth Momentum
jstor.orgtamu.edu
 jstor.orgtamu.eduLeads
Monthly Visits9.4M6.2Mjstor.org
MoM Change-10%+14%tamu.edu
Avg. Session3m32s5m05stamu.edu
Pages / Visit5.56.1tamu.edu

Growth Momentum · Insight

jstor.org is losing traffic (-10%) despite 9.4M monthly visits. tamu.edu's +14% growth puts it on a trajectory to overtake.

Acquisition Strategy

 jstor.orgtamu.eduLeads
Primary ChannelSearch 58%Direct 41%
Bounce Rate47.2%36.2%tamu.edu
SEO & Keywords3030
jstor.org
Search 58%Direct 28%Social 3%Referral 11%
tamu.edu
Search 34%Direct 41%Social 3%Referral 18%Email 4%
SearchDirectSocialReferralPaidEmail
24
6
24
jstor.org OnlySharedtamu.edu Only

Keyword Overlap Rate: 11%

Acquisition Strategy · Insight

jstor.org acquires users primarily through Search (58%), while tamu.edu relies on Direct (41%). This reflects fundamentally different go-to-market strategies — tamu.edu's higher direct traffic suggests stronger brand recognition or product-led growth, while jstor.org's search reliance means growth is more scalable but more vulnerable to algorithm changes.

Business Maturity

 jstor.orgtamu.eduLeads
Domain Age30y 6m
RegisteredFeb 1996
ExpiresFeb 2031

Market Position

 jstor.orgtamu.eduLeads
Global Rank#4.8K#7.9Kjstor.org
Category Rank#4#33jstor.org
jstor.orgtamu.edu
🇺🇸 United States
35%
90%
🇩🇪 Germany
7%
0%
🇮🇳 India
4%
0%

jstor.org only

🇬🇧 United Kingdom 8%🇮🇹 Italy 5%

tamu.edu only

🌐 Vietnam 1%🌐 Saudi Arabia 1%

Market Position · Insight

Each has untapped markets the other serves: jstor.org could expand into Vietnam, Saudi Arabia, while tamu.edu could target United Kingdom, Italy.

Key Takeaways

  • jstor.org is losing traffic (-10%) despite 9.4M monthly visits. tamu.edu's +14% growth puts it on a trajectory to overtake.
  • jstor.org acquires users primarily through Search (58%), while tamu.edu relies on Direct (41%). This reflects fundamentally different go-to-market strategies — tamu.edu's higher direct traffic suggests stronger brand recognition or product-led growth, while jstor.org's search reliance means growth is more scalable but more vulnerable to algorithm changes.
  • jstor.org has 1.5x more traffic (9.4M vs 6.2M), though both operate at comparable scale.
  • tamu.edu is growing (+14%) while jstor.org is declining (-10%).
  • tamu.edu has a 11 percentage point lower bounce rate (36% vs 47%), indicating better landing page relevance or more targeted traffic.
  • jstor.org acquires traffic primarily through Search (58%), while tamu.edu relies on Direct (41%) — fundamentally different acquisition strategies.

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