scamadviser.com vs who.is
Market traction comparison · Updated Jul 2026
| scamadviser.com | who.is | Leads | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Monthly Visits | 4.9M | 1.9M | scamadviser.com |
| Bounce Rate | 49.7% | 30.9% | who.is |
| SEO & Keywords | 30 | 30 | Tie |
| Domain Age | 15y 2m | 24y 2m | who.is |
who.is leads in 2 of 4 dimensions, while scamadviser.com leads in 1.
Growth Momentum
| scamadviser.com | who.is | Leads | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Monthly Visits | 4.9M | 1.9M | scamadviser.com |
| MoM Change | +11% | +9% | scamadviser.com |
| Avg. Session | 0m47s | 1m12s | who.is |
| Pages / Visit | 2.4 | 2.9 | who.is |
Growth Momentum · Insight
scamadviser.com receives 2.5x more monthly traffic than who.is (4.9M vs 1.9M).
Acquisition Strategy
| scamadviser.com | who.is | Leads | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Primary Channel | Search 74% | Search 60% | |
| Bounce Rate | 49.7% | 30.9% | who.is |
| SEO & Keywords | 30 | 30 | — |
Keyword Overlap Rate: 11%
Acquisition Strategy · Insight
scamadviser.com acquires users primarily through Search (74%), while who.is relies on Search (60%). This reflects fundamentally different go-to-market strategies — who.is's higher direct traffic suggests stronger brand recognition or product-led growth, while scamadviser.com's search reliance means growth is more scalable but more vulnerable to algorithm changes.
Business Maturity
| scamadviser.com | who.is | Leads | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Domain Age | 15y 2m | 24y 2m | who.is |
| Registered | Jul 2011 | Jun 2002 | |
| Expires | Jul 2026 | — |
Business Maturity · Insight
who.is has been in the market for over a decade, indicating established presence.
Market Position
| scamadviser.com | who.is | Leads | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Global Rank | #13.2K | #29.1K | scamadviser.com |
| Category Rank | #203 | #100 | who.is |
scamadviser.com only
who.is only
Market Position · Insight
Each has untapped markets the other serves: scamadviser.com could expand into Italy, Indonesia, while who.is could target Canada, Germany.
Key Takeaways
- •scamadviser.com receives 2.5x more monthly traffic than who.is (4.9M vs 1.9M).
- •scamadviser.com acquires users primarily through Search (74%), while who.is relies on Search (60%). This reflects fundamentally different go-to-market strategies — who.is's higher direct traffic suggests stronger brand recognition or product-led growth, while scamadviser.com's search reliance means growth is more scalable but more vulnerable to algorithm changes.
- •scamadviser.com receives 2.5x more monthly traffic than who.is (4.9M vs 1.9M).
- •who.is keeps visitors significantly longer (1m12s avg session vs scamadviser.com's 0m47s), suggesting deeper product engagement or stickier content.
- •who.is has a 19 percentage point lower bounce rate (31% vs 50%), indicating better landing page relevance or more targeted traffic.
- •They share 6 keywords (11% overlap), indicating direct search competition.
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