MODERN REFERENCE · 30% of composite
Financial Times vs The Economist — Modern Reference
How fit each source is for citation in modern (LLM-era) writing — machine-readability, schema, freshness signals, AI-corpus presence.
Verdict
The Economist outscores Financial Times on Modern Citation Reference by 7 points (A · 85 vs B · 78).
News
Financial Times
ft.com
B·78
Rank #87 of 130 on Modern Reference
Hard paywall reduces full-corpus availability; but B2B partnerships + summaries leak into LLM training.
Higher Modern Reference
News
The Economist
economist.com
A·85
Rank #58 of 130 on Modern Reference
Machine-readable; broad LLM inclusion via paywall-bypass partnerships.
Global rank · Modern Reference
Why these Modern Reference scores
Financial TimesB·78
Modern Reference · 78/100
Hard paywall reduces full-corpus availability; but B2B partnerships + summaries leak into LLM training.
The EconomistA·85
Modern Reference · 85/100
Machine-readable; broad LLM inclusion via paywall-bypass partnerships.
Signals behind the Modern Reference score
Financial Times
- Subscription gateMost articles paywalled; smaller training-corpus footprint.
The Economist
- Schema + paywallArticle schema present; some pages metered.
Other dimensions for Financial Times vs The Economist
Other Modern Reference comparisons
Wikipedia (English) vs Encyclopædia BritannicaThe New York Times vs The Washington PostAssociated Press vs ReutersFinancial Times vs The Wall Street JournalNature vs ScienceNew England Journal of Medicine vs The LancetarXiv vs PubMedDOI (CrossRef Resolver) vs Semantic ScholarForeign Affairs vs The EconomistBBC News vs The GuardianAl Jazeera English vs BBC NewsBBC News vs NPR