Aggregate AI readiness comparison across 53955 production sites. This compares all sites built on each framework, not the framework websites themselves.
Vercel Next.js
Across 53955 crawled sites, Next.js outperforms Vercel in aggregate AI visibility—winning 6 of 8 metrics in this architectural benchmark. Next.js sites average an ACRI score of 42.0 compared to 26.6 for Vercel—a meaningful 15-point gap that reflects real differences in how AI crawlers experience these sites. Vercel delivers a 70% leaner Token Bloat ratio (91.7× vs 308.5×), meaning AI systems can extract content more cost-effectively from Vercel-powered sites. On schema coverage, Next.js averages 1.1 structured data types per site vs 0.3 for Vercel—3.7× more out-of-the-box schema markup. Next.js sites render 8% less ghost HTML on average (6% vs 14%), delivering more server-side content to AI crawlers. This analysis is based on 1671 Vercel sites and 52284 Next.js sites from our 100k-domain radar database. Implementation quality varies—scan your own site to see how you compare.
| Metric | Vercel (n=1671) | Next.js (n=52284) | Δ% | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ACRI Score | 26.6 | 42.0WIN | 37% | Next.js |
| AI Readiness | 46.5 | 60.0WIN | 22% | Next.js |
| Token Bloat | 91.7×WIN | 308.5× | 70% | Vercel |
| Ghost Ratio | 14% | 6%WIN | 58% | Next.js |
| Schema Coverage | 0.3 | 1.1WIN | 73% | Next.js |
| Schema Adoption | 9% | 32%WIN | 73% | Next.js |
| GPTBot Access | 95%WIN | 94% | 2% | Vercel |
| Structure Score | 2.5 | 6.5WIN | 62% | Next.js |
These are aggregate stats across thousands of sites. Your specific Vercel or Next.js implementation may outperform or underperform the average.