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.
The Economist outscores Financial Times on Modern Citation Reference by 7 points (A · 85 vs B · 78).
Financial Times
Hard paywall reduces full-corpus availability; but B2B partnerships + summaries leak into LLM training.
The Economist
Machine-readable; broad LLM inclusion via paywall-bypass partnerships.
Global rank · Modern Reference
Why these Modern Reference scores
Hard paywall reduces full-corpus availability; but B2B partnerships + summaries leak into LLM training.
Machine-readable; broad LLM inclusion via paywall-bypass partnerships.
Signals behind the Modern Reference score
- Subscription gateMost articles paywalled; smaller training-corpus footprint.
- Schema + paywallArticle schema present; some pages metered.
Other dimensions for Financial Times vs The Economist
Other Modern Reference comparisons
Sources & references
Every score on this page is read from the two publications below and graded against the published rubric. No score is bought, estimated or supplied by the source being scored.
- Source evaluated — Financial Times (ft.com) · verified · full scoring record
- Source evaluated — The Economist (economist.com) · verified · full scoring record
- Scoring rubric — SourceScore Index, Citation Discipline, Modern Reference, Citation Velocity (methodology v0.1)
- Machine-readable record — /api/compare/ft-vs-the-economist/modern-reference.json