Need help? Check out our Support site, then


Feed Reader Stats

  1. I have a question concerning stats. It just dawned on me that people who read my blog / posts through a feed reader are not necessarily coming to my site. As a result their read of my material is not being counted by Word Press Blog stats. Can I assume that by adding up the # of people who have read my material through feed readers will give me an accurate total of people that actually read my material?

  2. opps. Adding the number of blog stats to the # of feed readers since I started back on February 6, 2007? Would that give an accurate total, at least from Word Press's perspective?

  3. Pretty much if you add the two counts together, you'd get a better count.

    There's a question on if the counts from the feed services like Bloglines are being counted as as complete readers or just how many times a day that services pulls your RSS. I feel it's the later.

  4. Dr. Mike,
    Thanks for getting back to me Sir. I am not quite sure if I understand you. Are you saying that I can go back to all the feed reads, add them up and then add them to the current word press blog stats and that will be a pretty accurate total of the people that have visited my site or read my material?

    Have a great day.

  5. Yes, that's what he's saying.

    One interesting thing that you can learn from the ratio of feed readers to regular readers, is you can gauge how technically sophisticated your readers are. If you have more than about 10% feed readers, you've got a more advanced crowd reading your blog. Below that, less so.

  6. Thanks for you input. Raincoaster, does that mean they are tech savy or intelligent? Sophistication can mean different things to different people. Please explain. Thank you.

  7. As I said, it means they're technically sophisticated. In no sense would "sophisticated" ever mean intelligent. It just means they're more techie.

  8. I am attempting to read between the lines. Beyond knowing people that use feed readers to
    read my material are sophisticated technically, is there anything else I can deduce from that information?

  9. I was going to say that those folks are probably reading a lot of blogs but now that I think of that, they still might only be pulling just yours.

    They did go through the trouble of adding in your URL into their reader. That must mean they agree with what you're saying.

  10. Dr. Mike,
    I have attempted to understand what you shared above, but am still confused. Can you please help me understand RSS feeds as they apply to what you shared above? Thank you.

  11. Think of those visitors thining that you're one of their favorite boook authors. They go out of their way to pick up and read anything that you publish. When they go into their bookstore, they ask if you have anything new out and available.

  12. Thanks so very much for that explanation. Helps me big time. God bless you Dr. Mike. Have a great weekend.

  13. You're welcome. :)

  14. Okay. I have a blog that's about 1 month old. I "get" how the stats work (though am intrigued by the formula here on how to guage reader sophistication by the percentage who subscribe) What I don't have *any idea* about is what these numbers really *mean.* This may be a bigger question than anyone can address here (but perhaps there are blogging articles/books out there you know about?) E.G: How many hits do the "big blogs" get a day? 80? 800? 80,000? Several friends and I are hoping, someday, to show our stats to a literary agent, so it would be good to sort of have SOME IDEA of how to quantifiably rate our own blogs, and a vicinity to be aiming for...
    Thanks!

  15. I got 3,500 hits yesterday and placed 28th on the Top Blogs list.

    (That actually seems low to me)

  16. Perez Hilton gets three to four million a day. If you want to know where you stand in the WordPress blogosphere, check the main WordPress.com page and the Top Blogs and Top Posts.

  17. Feed stats are computed using the number of subscribers reported by each robot's user agent header.

    Huh? :-)

    Your web browser sends its name and version with every request. This can be turned off, but the standard behavior is to send it. This information is called the User Agent header.

    Any kind of program that request data across the web can send its own User Agent header to tell the server what is making the request. You can recognize Googlebot and the other search engine bots by their UA header.

    Feed aggregators like Bloglines also send the UA header but they usually also include extra information so that we (the publisher) can know how many subscribers are represented by that one request.

    The number of requests made by any one agent is not a factor in the Feed Stats on your blog. Sometimes the bots go a little crazy and request feeds more or less often than they should and sometimes they don't bother requesting the feed because they haven't heard a ping ("ping" is the noise your blog makes when you publish a new post, to oversimplify). We just use the latest number from each agent seen that day, regardless of the number of requests.

    We also count as one subscriber each request by a program that does not report the number of subscribers. Some uniqueness tests are applied, but in general you can boost your feed stats by one for the day if you visit your own feed in your browser.

    So there you have it. Although feed stats are not nearly as accurate as the usual blog stats, they give an approximate picture of how many people have subscribed and which aggregators they use. Some blogs here have tens of thousands of subscribers.

  18. I'm not Paris Hilton! And I don't write jazzy things about new WP plug-ins, am only minimally interested in politics and pop culture, and am over 30. Also, frankly, some of the most popular WP sites leave me going "whhaaa??!!!" (which could be a verbatim quote, I think, from several of them, with posts that seem to have taken about 5 minutes, sans spellchecker, to write...) All of my eccentricities are severe handicaps in the blogosphere, I realize (!!) But I do have a solid and growing percentage of subscribed readers, who are themselves solid and valuable to me (judging by comments, links, and private emails back and forth). As I'll never have stats in the vicinity of Paris Hilton's or The Web Worker's Daily, not to mention that my blog is entirely unlike either of theirs, I suppose Google and the local bookstore (and my writing friends with connections to knowledgable agents) must be my next sources of info here... but I still would appreciate any URL's, book recommendations, or other wisdom you seasoned WP users might have to give me on how to make marketable use of blog stats.

  19. hello. i'm not sure if this helps (benchmark data):

    i started blogging a month ago and have not done any marketing beyond sending a link to 30 or so colleagues (about one a day) to get feedback.

    i'm now getting 10 - 40 views/day (lower on weeekends), but my feed stats have been steadily climbing and are less volatile.

    e.g. today, i have 9 views so far, but 18 via feed stats - e.g. a total of 27 and 1 view for every 2 feed subs.

    by the way, is a view equal to 1 unique visitor?

    thank you

  20. @osweatman

    Questions about stats
    Please note what Andy the Key Master who has designed the stats program said in this thread two posts above your own. He's the authority. Also note the information here and you will find an answer to your question http://faq.wordpress.com/2006/02/09/questions-about-stats/
    The stats reflect page views and not unique visitors. If I visit your blog and view 10 pages then you will have 10 in your stats.

    Increasing traffic to your blog
    Join social networks.
    Read this advice http://faq.wordpress.com/2006/11/15/more-traffic/
    More tips can be found here http://pimpmyblog.wordpress.com

  21. got it. thanks... so, the only way i can get a better handle on UV's/day is to add a UV counter in my widget bar, is that correct?

  22. The only kind of counters you can add to your blog are those that are in html - not javascript and it's javascript that's required to determine unique visitors so that's a no go for security reasons http://faq.wordpress.com/2006/05/07/javascript-can-i-use-that-on-my-blog/

    Please note this thread http://faq.wordpress.com/2006/07/28/can-i-have-a-statcounter-on-my-blog/ and this one http://faq.wordpress.com/2006/05/20/how-do-i-add-a-counter-using-a-widget/

    As you are new to wordpress this link will lead you to the basic resources where you can find the answers to your questions http://en.forums.wordpress.com/topic.php?id=5257&page&replies=19

  23. General thanks all around. Good stuff to look into as I get the chance.
    Today I added a prominent "subscribe" button to make that part easier (subscriptions are KEY, I've gathered) and I'm all excited about feedburner now, too (followed another very long-and-still-unresolved-thread. It's NOT a feed reader, it's NOT a feed reader...) It's been very worthwhile learning about the social networks, too. (that's really "web 2.0" of me, isn't it?) and today got my "Marilee Jones" postings featured as #1 on BOTH WordPress.com AND Technorati (for, um, the "marilee jones" tag, that is. But I'll take celebrity any way I can get it.

  24. osweatman - what is your blog URL? I'd like to visit. Re benchmarks: I'm up to an average of 22 subscribed daily readers (yes, the steadiness of these stats *are* much more reassuring than the daily hit count, which looks like an EKG!) Yesterday I had 15 dailies, today I had 81 (due, no doubt, to my 15 minutes of fame). My average daily, if I could even venture to make that jaggedy thing into an average, is about 30. Mondays seem to be the worse. I, too, sent links to people I know at first. WordPress tags bring readers pretty regularly (I'm going to use more of them, I've decided. "Humor" and "jokes" are good ones...) Also, any time I mention a recent book or news item/social issue, search engines bring folks in. And some of the search threads are so weird and wonderful it's almost worth having the stats page just for THOSE.

Topic Closed

This topic has been closed to new replies.

About this Topic