Ars Technica vs MIT Technology Review
Ars Technica vs MIT Technology Review, compared side by side on 17 data points: what each one does, how big it is, what it has raised, the tech running each site, and what users report. We score both out of 100 on traction, team and visibility: Ars Technica is on 25/100 and MIT Technology Review on 28/100.
Where each one leads
Ars Technica
Leads on none of the measures we hold for both companies.
MIT Technology Review
- positive user sentiment: 75% positive against 40% positive
- our overall score: 28/100 against 25/100
- agent readiness: 46/100 against 21/100
- headcount: 1,963 against 177
- LinkedIn following: 1,520,582 against 56,048
At a glance
| Measure | Ars Technica | MIT Technology Review |
|---|---|---|
| What it is | In-depth technology news, reviews, and analysis for tech enthusiasts and professionals. | Independent media company reporting on innovation and emerging technologies. |
| Category | Online Audio and Video Media, Technology News, Tech Analysis, Consumer Electronics | Book and Periodical Publishing, Media, Technology Journalism, Innovation Reporting |
| Sells toBusiness model | B2C | B2C |
| Offering | Services | Media |
| Founded | 1998 | 1899 |
| Headquarters | New York, US | Cambridge, US |
| Status | Active | Active |
Size, funding and growth
| Measure | Ars Technica | MIT Technology Review |
|---|---|---|
| Employees | 177 | 1,963 |
| LinkedIn followers | 56,048 | 1,520,582 |
StartupHub scores
Our own 0-100 ratings. They measure company strength and site quality, not which product suits you.
| Measure | Ars Technica | MIT Technology Review |
|---|---|---|
| StartupHub scoreOur 0-100 rating | 25/100 | 28/100 |
| Traction | 20/100 | 20/100 |
| Search visibility | 36/100 | 31/100 |
| Quality | 30/100 | 35/100 |
| Agent readinessHow well an AI agent can read and act on the site | F (21/100) | D (46/100) |
| Domain ratingLink authority, 0-100 | 90/100 | 90/100 |
Technology
Detected on each public site, so it reflects the marketing stack as well as the product.
| Measure | Ars Technica | MIT Technology Review |
|---|---|---|
| Hosting | AWS | Self Managed |
| CMS | WordPress | Not detected |
| Frameworks | Jquery, Alpinejs, Tailwind CSS | Not detected |
| Analytics | Google Tag Manager | Not detected |
What users say
| Measure | Ars Technica | MIT Technology Review |
|---|---|---|
| Reddit sentimentThreads we track | 2 positive, 1 negative across 5 threads | 3 positive, 0 negative across 4 threads |
“MacBook Neo hands-on: Apple build quality at a substantially lower price - ArsTechnica. The Neo won’t be for everyone, but Apple has managed to preserve a premium feel.”r/apple
“The mission of Digital Technology Review is to make technology a greater force for good by bringing about better-informed, more conscious technology decisions through authoritative, influential, and trustworthy info.”r/
Ars Technica vs MIT Technology Review: common questions
Which is better, Ars Technica or MIT Technology Review?
On our 0-100 score MIT Technology Review rates higher (28/100 against 25/100). The score weights traction, team, visibility and profile completeness, so it reflects company strength rather than which product suits you. We compare the two on 17 data points above: read the rows that match what you are buying for.
How do Ars Technica and MIT Technology Review compare on the numbers?
MIT Technology Review leads on positive user sentiment (75% positive against 40% positive), our overall score (28/100 against 25/100), agent readiness (46/100 against 21/100), headcount (1,963 against 177), LinkedIn following (1,520,582 against 56,048).
What do real users say about Ars Technica and MIT Technology Review?
Ars Technica: 2 positive and 1 negative mentions across 5 Reddit threads we track, mostly in r/apple. MIT Technology Review: 3 positive and 0 negative mentions across 4 Reddit threads we track.
Read the full Ars Technica review and pricing or the MIT Technology Review review and pricing. You can also browse other Ars Technica alternatives we track.