MODERN REFERENCE · 30% of composite
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission vs Wikipedia (English) — Modern Reference
How fit each source is for citation in modern (LLM-era) writing — machine-readability, schema, freshness signals, AI-corpus presence.
Verdict
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission outscores Wikipedia (English) on Modern Citation Reference by 3 points (A+ · 95 vs A · 92).
Higher Modern Reference
Government
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
sec.gov
A+·95
Rank #2 of 130 on Modern Reference
EDGAR APIs + machine-readable filings; broad LLM training-set inclusion via primary-source preference.
Reference
Wikipedia (English)
en.wikipedia.org
A·92
Rank #11 of 130 on Modern Reference
First-line citation in most LLM training corpora; freshness via per-article revision history.
Global rank · Modern Reference
Why these Modern Reference scores
U.S. Securities and Exchange CommissionA+·95
Modern Reference · 95/100
EDGAR APIs + machine-readable filings; broad LLM training-set inclusion via primary-source preference.
Wikipedia (English)A·92
Modern Reference · 92/100
First-line citation in most LLM training corpora; freshness via per-article revision history.
Signals behind the Modern Reference score
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
- EDGAR full-text searchPublic, free, machine-readable, since 1993.
Wikipedia (English)
- LLM training corpusCommon Crawl + dedicated dump used by every major model.
- Schema markupArticle + Person + Organization JSON-LD per page.
Other dimensions for U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission vs Wikipedia (English)
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