science.org vs sciencenews.org
Market traction comparison · Updated Jul 2026
| science.org | sciencenews.org | Leads | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Monthly Visits | 6.5M | 821.8K | science.org |
| Bounce Rate | 42.7% | 57.5% | science.org |
| SEO & Keywords | 30 | 30 | Tie |
| Domain Age | 31y 6m | 30y 7m | science.org |
science.org leads in 3 of 4 dimensions, while sciencenews.org leads in 0.
Growth Momentum
| science.org | sciencenews.org | Leads | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Monthly Visits | 6.5M | 821.8K | science.org |
| MoM Change | +3% | -19% | science.org |
| Avg. Session | 2m31s | 1m05s | science.org |
| Pages / Visit | 3.1 | 2.3 | science.org |
Growth Momentum · Insight
sciencenews.org is losing traffic (-19%) despite 821.8K monthly visits. science.org's +3% growth puts it on a trajectory to overtake.
Acquisition Strategy
| science.org | sciencenews.org | Leads | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Primary Channel | Search 37% | Direct 55% | |
| Bounce Rate | 42.7% | 57.5% | science.org |
| SEO & Keywords | 30 | 30 | — |
Keyword Overlap Rate: 107%
| Keyword | Volume | science.org | sciencenews.org |
|---|---|---|---|
| science ai | 4.9K | #3 | #9 |
Acquisition Strategy · Insight
science.org acquires users primarily through Search (37%), while sciencenews.org relies on Direct (55%). This reflects fundamentally different go-to-market strategies — sciencenews.org's higher direct traffic suggests stronger brand recognition or product-led growth, while science.org's search reliance means growth is more scalable but more vulnerable to algorithm changes.
Business Maturity
| science.org | sciencenews.org | Leads | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Domain Age | 31y 6m | 30y 7m | science.org |
| Registered | Feb 1995 | Jan 1996 | |
| Expires | Feb 2029 | Jan 2027 |
Business Maturity · Insight
science.org has been in the market for over a decade, indicating established presence.
Market Position
| science.org | sciencenews.org | Leads | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Global Rank | #9.4K | #69.2K | science.org |
| Category Rank | #19 | #750 | science.org |
science.org only
sciencenews.org only
Market Position · Insight
Each has untapped markets the other serves: science.org could expand into Australia, Canada, Brazil, while sciencenews.org could target China, Germany, Japan.
Key Takeaways
- •sciencenews.org is losing traffic (-19%) despite 821.8K monthly visits. science.org's +3% growth puts it on a trajectory to overtake.
- •science.org acquires users primarily through Search (37%), while sciencenews.org relies on Direct (55%). This reflects fundamentally different go-to-market strategies — sciencenews.org's higher direct traffic suggests stronger brand recognition or product-led growth, while science.org's search reliance means growth is more scalable but more vulnerable to algorithm changes.
- •science.org receives 7.9x more monthly traffic than sciencenews.org (6.5M vs 821.8K).
- •science.org is growing (+3%) while sciencenews.org is declining (-19%).
- •science.org keeps visitors significantly longer (2m31s avg session vs sciencenews.org's 1m05s), suggesting deeper product engagement or stickier content.
- •science.org has a 15 percentage point lower bounce rate (43% vs 58%), indicating better landing page relevance or more targeted traffic.
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