Comparison Table Presence

What this parameter measures

Comparison-style and review pages should back their claims with a real comparison table, and that is what this parameter checks. friendly4AI first resolves the page's content type. Then, only on COMPARISON and REVIEW pages, it scans every <table> element for a qualifying structure: at least two columns, at least two data rows, and at least two columns whose cells hold two or more distinct values. That diversity test screens out layout tables and pure key-value tables, which are not genuine comparisons. On every other content type (article, tutorial, glossary, product, or unknown), the parameter does not apply and is skipped, so non-comparison pages are never penalised.

Why it matters for AI-readiness

When someone asks an AI engine "X vs Y" or "best tool for Z", the model wants side-by-side facts it can lift directly. A well-formed comparison table hands it exactly that: structured rows and columns that extract far more reliably than the same facts buried in prose. Pages that make comparison claims without a table force the model to reconstruct the comparison itself, which it often skips in favour of a competitor's table. On comparison and review pages, a qualifying table is one of the strongest signals you can ship for being cited in comparison-style answers.

How we score it

On the pages it applies to, the v4.4 methodology scores this Content Structure parameter as binary. The processor scores 100 when at least one qualifying comparison table is found and 0 otherwise. There is no native middle tier, because the underlying check is presence-or-absence. A page passes with one or more qualifying tables. The partial band describes the realistic near miss the rubric warns about: a table exists on the page but fails to qualify (it is layout-only, a key-value pair, or short of the two-diverse-column and two-data-row thresholds) and so still scores 0 against the binary check. A page fails when no qualifying table is present. Pages outside the comparison/review content types are skipped entirely and excluded from scoring.

How to fix common issues

• On a comparison or review page, add a real comparison table with at least two columns and at least two data rows.
• Make sure at least two columns carry diverse values across rows. A column where every cell repeats does not count toward a qualifying table.
• Replace layout tables and key-value tables with a genuine side-by-side comparison of the options or features.
• Confirm the page is recognised as a comparison or review (clear vs/compare/review signals) so the table is actually scored rather than skipped.
• Re-scan and check the qualifyingTables, largestTableColumns, and contentTypeHint evidence fields.