We're numbers junkies pretty much wherever the numbers are. As far as Internet numbers go, we like looking at Quantcast for numbers, especially when sites are directly measured like ours. But now deadline.com (as of a couple of weeks or so ago) is directly measured too.
There are a lot of ways to look at the numbers and Quantcast lets you compare the results to other sites, and look at different date ranges -- which is fortunate, because a huge August spike for us courtesy of Matt Drudge -- makes the scale of the charts fairly unreadable when you look at our long term trends.
But here's a look at our traffic vs. Deadline Hollywood's. We typically have more page views than Deadline Hollywood (excepting a nice spike for DH due to Nikki being profiled in the New Yorker magazine), but Nikki has a few more people coming to her site (and a lot more during her recent spike).
But even without the spike Deadline Hollywood has more visitors. What's it mean? It means we have fewer visitors, but generally they are reading more pages per visit than Deadline Hollywood's visitors, so we wind up with more page views.
You can go to Quantcast and play around yourself. But you might want to hurry. For example, Sharon Waxman's well-funded, cash burning start up, The Wrap, used to be directly measured on Quantcast. Then it wasn't, for a couple of weeks, and now as of a couple of days ago, it looks like it is measured again. For their sake I hope that there is some glitch where all page views are not coded for measurement.
Sadly, James Hibberd's THR feed isn't directly measured on Quantcast. My guess is that he is beating us and Deadline Hollywood (and of course, The Wrap) handily, and yet Nikki Finke, not James, gets the New Yorker profile! But that's just a guess since the THR Feed site isn't directly measured. On Compete.com, which has always vastly under-reported our actual numbers, but still does a very good job as far as showing the general trend, the advantage definitely goes to Hibberd.