Where are the readers of DEV from?

Gabor Szabo - Nov 24 '22 - - Dev Community

As far as I know DEV does not provide information about the visitors to the site, so I looked at the data collected by SimilarWeb

There might be some slight differences among the numbers as some of the reports are averaging the last 3 months, some for the "month to day". Even the percentages fluctuate quite a bit from month to month.

Here is what I saw on Nov 24, 2022:

Topic Value Comment
Global rank 7,162
Country rank 3,730 India, which is the biggest source of visitors
Category Rank 123 Computers Electronics and Technology / Programming and Developer Software
Total monthly visits 13 M average of last 3 months
Page Views 20.51 M
Pages per visit 1.58 Total monthly visits / Page Views
Monthly unique visitors 5.868 M
Bounce rate 76.72 %
Visit duration 1:33 min

Top countries

# Country Percentage
1 India 10.25%
2 USA 9.94%
3 Vietnam 4.06%
4 Poland 3.63%
5 Brazil 3.59%
6 Germany 2.94%
7 France 2.82%
8 Turkey 2.82%
9 Indonesia 2.15%
10 Nigeria 2.01%
11 United Kingdom 1.94%
12 Russia 1.57%
13 Canada 1.55%
14 Argentina 1.49%
15 Czech Republic 1.46%
16 China 1.43%
17 Spain 1.37%
18 Colombia 1.36%
19 Netherlands 1.23%
20 Bangladesh 1.22%
21 Sweden 1.20%
22 Ukraine 1.16%
23 Thailand 1.12%
24 Australia 1.07%
25 Philippines 1.06%
26 Mexico 1.04%
27 Pakistan 0.98%
28 Italy 0.85%
29 Egypt 0.85%
30 Switzerland 0.82%
31 Taiwan 0.81%
32 Georgia 0.76%
33 Singapore 0.76%
34 Korea, Republic of 0.75%
35 Hungary 0.74%
36 Japan 0.74%
37 Iran 0.73%
38 Hong Kong 0.72%
39 Israel 0.71%
40 Norway 0.70%
41 Chile 0.69%
42 Finland 0.68%
43 Morocco 0.66%
44 Malaysia 0.66%
45 Nepal 0.66%
46 Belgium 0.65%
47 Romania 0.62%
48 Portugal 0.61%
49 Bulgaria 0.58%
50 Sri Lanka 0.57%

What I always miss from these tables is visitor/capita for each country. It should not be too hard to add and in some cases knowing that could be also interesting.

Maybe not useful for marketing, but for general knowledge.

In any case, some of the numbers here are very surprising. Maybe they are skewed because of the method of data collection of SimilarWeb. I can't be sure.

Marketing Channels

Source %
Organic Search 69.78
Direct 23.34%
Referrals 4.64%
Social 2.54%
Email 0.79 %

If I understand this correctly, "Direct" means people who are typing in dev.to in the address-bar or maybe having it in their bookmarks.

Organic Search is mostly Google with some DuckDuckGo and a tiny bit Bing.

Top Referring sites

As I understand this is the division of the 4.64% mentioned under "Referrals" in the "Marketing Channels" table.

# Site %
1 api.daily.dev 53.55%
2 github.com 12.18%
3 search.brave.com 9.78%
4 app.daily.dev 2.55%
5 medium.com 1.21%
6 dormoshe.io 0.79%
7 presearch.com 0.72%
8 inoreader.com 0.64%
9 you.com 0.62%
10 codecademy.com 0.53%
11 roadmap.sh 0.52%
12 commclassroom.org 0.49%
13 platzi.com 0.42%
14 yandex.ru 0.40%
15 qiita.com 0.33%

Social Traffic

As I understand this is the division of that 2.54% mentioned under "Social" in the "Marketing Channels" table

Site %
Facebook 28.43 %
Twitter 23.71 %
YouTube 20.70 %
LinkedIn 13.56%
Reddit 7.59 %
Other 6.01 %

Sources

This, as I understand, is a table where all the sourced of visits can be seen together (unlike the categorization above)

Source %
Google search 65.47 %
Direct 21.34 %
api.daily.dev 2.83 %
DuckDuckGo 2.14 %
Image search 1.16 %
Email 0.79 %
Facebook 0.72 %
Bing Search 0.60 %
Twitter 0.60 %
github.com 0.59 %

Device

Device %
Desktop 85.01 %
Mobile 14.99 %

Gender

Gender %
Male 76.35 %
Female 23.65 %
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .