Aggregate AI readiness comparison across 162339 production sites. This compares all sites built on each framework, not the framework websites themselves.
Webflow WordPress
Across 162339 crawled sites, WordPress outperforms Webflow in aggregate AI visibility—winning 6 of 8 metrics in this architectural benchmark. WordPress sites average an ACRI score of 54.4 compared to 35.5 for Webflow—a meaningful 19-point gap that reflects real differences in how AI crawlers experience these sites. Token efficiency strongly favors Webflow (18.6×) over WordPress (23.8×)—a 22% difference that directly impacts AI processing costs. On schema coverage, WordPress averages 1.2 structured data types per site vs 0.5 for Webflow—2.4× more out-of-the-box schema markup. WordPress sites render 10% less ghost HTML on average (0% vs 10%), delivering more server-side content to AI crawlers. This analysis is based on 2642 Webflow sites and 159697 WordPress sites from our 100k-domain radar database. Implementation quality varies—scan your own site to see how you compare.
| Metric | Webflow (n=2642) | WordPress (n=159697) | Δ% | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ACRI Score | 35.5 | 54.4WIN | 35% | WordPress |
| AI Readiness | 64.1 | 72.2WIN | 11% | WordPress |
| Token Bloat | 18.6×WIN | 23.8× | 22% | Webflow |
| Ghost Ratio | 10% | 0%WIN | 100% | WordPress |
| Schema Coverage | 0.5 | 1.2WIN | 58% | WordPress |
| Schema Adoption | 28% | 50%WIN | 44% | WordPress |
| GPTBot Access | 97%WIN | 93% | 4% | Webflow |
| Structure Score | 1.0 | 8.4WIN | 88% | WordPress |
These are aggregate stats across thousands of sites. Your specific Webflow or WordPress implementation may outperform or underperform the average.