7,595 domains analyzed · 20 categories · Free & instant reports

Compare Domains

Compare website value, traffic, SEO and hosting signals side by side.

Browse Rankings
Use this domain comparison to benchmark value, traffic, SEO quality, technical health and trust signals side by side.

Executive Summary

A fast head-to-head view of which domain leads in the areas that matter most.

fast.com 3 time.com 1
fast.com leads in :lane
fast.com wins this lane with stronger combined signals than :other.
Business: time.com Reach: fast.com SEO: fast.com Performance: fast.com Trust: Balanced
Business
time.com
fast.com
2
time.com
3
Value gap $436,549
Income gap $56
Reach
fast.com
fast.com
3
time.com
0
Visitors gap 1,776
Pageviews gap 6,216
SEO
fast.com
fast.com
3
time.com
1
Seo gap 3.0
Onpage gap 28
Performance
fast.com
fast.com
2
time.com
0
Performance gap 55
Trust
Balanced
fast.com
0
time.com
0

Next Best Moves

The clearest actions to close the gap and improve this domain fastest.

fast.com
Priority is based on the current gap, likely impact and available audit evidence.
4 priorities
Resolve safety risk signals
Trust Gain about 24 priority points
Why: Negative safety classification can severely reduce trust and traffic.
Do next: Scan and clean malware/phishing indicators, harden CMS/plugins, and request re-evaluation.
Strengthen on-page relevance
On-page 28 points behind
Why: time.com has weaker title, description, headings or content-depth signals than the competing domain.
Do next: Tighten title/description quality, heading structure and homepage content depth.
Improve internal linking depth
Architecture 183 internal links behind
Why: The competing domain exposes more internal links from the homepage and looks easier to crawl.
Do next: Expose more important pages through clearer internal links and navigation paths.
Expand structured data coverage
Structured data 1 schema blocks behind
Why: time.com uses more structured data blocks, which can improve machine understanding and rich result coverage.
Do next: Add clean schema markup for the brand, organization and key page entities.
time.com
Priority is based on the current gap, likely impact and available audit evidence.
2 priorities
Resolve safety risk signals
Trust Gain about 24 priority points
Why: Negative safety classification can severely reduce trust and traffic.
Do next: Scan and clean malware/phishing indicators, harden CMS/plugins, and request re-evaluation.
Lift technical performance
Performance 55 points behind
Why: Speed or rendering signals lag behind the competing domain and may hold back SEO quality.
Do next: Improve Core Web Vitals, image delivery and frontend payload before the next refresh.
Metric fast.com Winner time.com
Estimated Value $308,371,749 time.com $308,808,299
Daily Visitors 46,081 fast.com 44,305
Daily Pageviews 161,284 fast.com 155,068
Daily Income $1,452 fast.com $1,396
SEO Score 84 fast.com 81
Indexability 100 — 100
OnPage 63 time.com 91
Performance 100 fast.com 45
Trust 65 — 65
Coverage 86 time.com 100
Confidence 88 time.com 100
SEO Freshness (h) 328 time.com 306
Country Switzerland — Canada
TLD com — com
Category — — —
Registrar MarkMonitor Inc. — MarkMonitor Inc.
Internal Links 27 time.com 210
Structured Data Blocks 0 time.com 1
PageSpeed Mobile — time.com 36
PageSpeed Desktop — time.com 53
PageRank 5 time.com 6
Tranco Rank #549 fast.com #571
SSL Grade B — B
Safety Status — — —

SEO Audit Snapshot

A compact technical SEO check so users can compare on-page readiness at a glance.

fast.com
84/100
Pass 8 Warn 2 Fail 1 IDX 100 ONP 63 PERF 100 TRUST 65
HTTP Status
200 Pass
Indexability
Indexable Pass
robots.txt
Found Pass
sitemap.xml
Found Pass
Canonical URL
Present Pass
H1 Count
0 Fail
Title Length
30 Pass
Description Length
116 Pass
HTML lang
Missing Warn
Viewport Meta
Missing Warn
Image Alt Coverage
0/0 Pass
time.com
81/100
Pass 10 Warn 1 Fail 0 IDX 100 ONP 91 PERF 45 TRUST 65
HTTP Status
200 Pass
Indexability
Indexable Pass
robots.txt
Found Pass
sitemap.xml
Found Pass
Canonical URL
Present Pass
H1 Count
1 Pass
Title Length
65 Pass
Description Length
133 Pass
HTML lang
en Pass
Viewport Meta
Present Pass
Image Alt Coverage
57/72 Warn

Top Levers Across Both Domains

Shared high-impact improvements pulled from the latest recommendations and audits.

Resolve safety risk signals
CRITICAL Impact 24 Effort L Confidence 94% Focus area Both
A: 24 | B: 24
Why it matters: Negative safety classification can severely reduce trust and traffic.
Recommended fix: Scan and clean malware/phishing indicators, harden CMS/plugins, and request re-evaluation.
Improve PageSpeed performance
HIGH Impact 12 Effort L Confidence 88% Focus area time.com
A: 0 | B: 12
Why it matters: Low performance can reduce rankings, engagement, and conversion.
Recommended fix: Optimize render-blocking resources, image delivery, caching, and script payload size.
Add one H1 heading
HIGH Impact 10 Effort S Confidence 90% Focus area fast.com
A: 10 | B: 0
Why it matters: Missing H1 weakens topical hierarchy for users and crawlers.
Recommended fix: Add exactly one descriptive H1 aligned with page intent.
Improve image ALT coverage
HIGH Impact 8 Effort M Confidence 84% Focus area time.com
A: 0 | B: 8
Why it matters: Missing ALT text reduces accessibility and image search context.
Recommended fix: Add concise descriptive ALT text for informative images and empty ALT for decorative assets.
Add structured data
MEDIUM Impact 5 Effort M Confidence 80% Focus area fast.com
A: 5 | B: 0
Why it matters: Structured data improves entity clarity and rich-result eligibility.
Recommended fix: Implement relevant JSON-LD schema types (Organization, WebSite, Product, Article, etc.).