Xing vs. LinkedIn: Comparing Features,
Geographical and Demographical Distribution
Erol Unkan
University of Camerino
School of Science and Technology
FHNW
School of Business
[email protected]
ABSTRACT
1.2 LinkedIn
This short paper shows an overview about the general
features and geographical distribution of Xing and LinkedIn
and makes a comparison between the two platforms.
LinkedIn is a US American business network founded in
2003. It is listed on the NYSE with a revenue of $972 million
(2012). About 4’800 employees are working in the company
(2012). The company has acquired various companies
working in the social networking field [5]. Reid Hoffman, its
founder also takes part in multiple Web 2.0 companies such
as PayPal, Mozilla and Flicker [6].
KEYWORDS
Business Networks, Xing, LinkedIn, Features, Geographical
Distribution
Xing and LinkedIn are both business (or professional)
networks. These are similar to social networks in every way
but provide a platform to network, share events and have
discussions mainly on a professional basis instead of private
life connections. Business networks try to replicate onto an
online platform what is happening in the offline real world
to simplify and quicken networking processes.
LinkedIn focuses on providing services mainly in North
America and Asia. It has about 259 million members in total.
In the DACH region LinkedIn has 4 million members [7].
However, there is no reliable source on how many paying
members the network has. Considering the revenue of $972
million in 2012 is made up entirely of subscriptions fees –
which is mostly unlikely – divided by the minimum annual
subscription fee of $95.40 and the maximum subscription
fee of $5999.40 [8] the amount of paying members ranges
from 10’189’000 (3.9%) to 162’000 (0.06%).
Notable business networks are Viadeo (France), Xing
(Germany) and LinkedIn (USA) [1]. The latter two will be
discussed in the following chapters.
These numbers are unreliable, but they show that even with
the best possible solution, LinkedIn still has significantly less
paying members than Xing.
1.1 Xing
2. COMPARISON OF FEATURES
1. INTRODUCTION
Xing is a German business network founded in 2003. It is
listed on the German stock market DAX with a revenue of
€73.3 million (2012). 519 employees are working in the
company (2012) [2]. It is part of Burda Digital GmbH as of
December 2012 [3].
Xing focuses on providing services mainly in the DACH
region (German, Austria, Switzerland), where it also has
significantly the most members [2]. It has about 14 million
members in total 808’000 paying members [2] or 5.8% of
the total. In the DACH region Xing has 7 Million members
[4].
The comparison of the features consists of two different
tables. Table 1 and 2 compare assets of both platforms and
basic features that come in for free for every member. Table
3 compares premium features that the user has to pay for.
Different subscription fees exist for different features.
Unless otherwise noted all information of table 1 and 2 is
taken from [9], and all information from table 3 is taken
from [10].
The comparison shows that the features mostly differ in the
free versions of the platforms. The premium functionality is
very similar, and in most cases identical. The main
difference is the different price settings of both networks.
This result was also shown in [11].
2.1 General Assets
Xing
Continuation from previous column …
Company profiles only
available with most
expensive subscription.
Free company profiles.
Job advertisements
supported. The prices are
generally more expensive,
the service better with
more options available.
Job advertisements
supported. The prices are
generally cheaper and the
functionality simpler.
Xing
LinkedIn
Over 50’000 discussion
groups [12].
Less, but growing
discussion groups.
Outdated functionality
compared to other social
networking sites
(Facebook, Google+).
Outdated functionality
compared to other social
networking sites
(Facebook, Google+).
Table 2 Basic Features
Mobile compatibility, but
limited functionality.
Mobile compatibility, but
limited functionality.
2.3 Premium Features
Only second option for
startups.
Is the main focus for
startups [13].
More detailed, but more
difficult to quickly
understand the main
functions.
More superficial, but
simpler and clearly
arranged layout.
Slowly growing
(20.5% from 2011 – 2013,
8.8% from 2012 – 2013)
[14].
Quickly growing
(97.7% from 2011 – 2013,
38.5% from 2012 – 2013)
[15].
Table 1 General assets
2.2 Basic Features
Xing
LinkedIn
Event organizing is
possible and encouraged.
The operability is
generally simpler and
more understandable.
Event organizing is
possible. The operability is
generally more difficult.
No business news.
Business news on the
home page.
Media is not yet fully
supported.
Media such as photos and
videos are supported.
Only the profile pictures
of visitors are visible.
Whole profile of visitors is
visible to every member.
Easier/better search
functions for headhunters
and recruiters.
Main focus on
entrepreneurs instead of
recruiters.
Messaging supported with
limited functionality.
More functionality in
messaging (archiving,
flagging, trash).
Continuation in next column …
LinkedIn
Xing
LinkedIn
€6.25 – €9.95 per month
$7.95 – $499.95 per
month [8]
See who watched the own
profile.
See who watched the own
profile.
Write to 20 non-contacts
per month.
3 – 25 messages to noncontacts per month
Advanced searching
(position, interests…)
enabled.
Advanced searching (no
detailed description)
enabled
Company profiles enabled.
Company profiles enabled
for free.
No automatic searches.
Automatic searches with
predefined search terms
10 times per day.
Table 3 Premium features
3. COMPARISON OF GEOGRAPHICAL
DISTRIBUTION
The comparison of the geographical distribution consists of
three different measures. Table 4 shows the website
ranking in the most important countries (USA and the DACH
region) and globally.
The ranking is show in absolute numbers and percentage of
visitors from specific countries. The ranking of Austria and
Switzerland are n/a (not applicable), the reason being that
it is smaller than the 10th place of the total ranking, which is
the Netherlands with 1.8% percent of the total visitors.
The numbers show how different the geographical
distribution is among both networks. More than 80% of
Xing’s visitors are from the DACH region with US Americans
being in the vast minority of 2.6%. LinkedIn’s statistics show
1
the contrary distribution. More than of all visitors of
3
LinkedIn are US American, while only about 1.9% – 5.7% are
from the DACH region (𝐷 = 1.9% + 𝐴 = 0% + 𝐶𝐻 =
0%; 𝐷 = 1.9% + 𝐴 = 1.9% + 𝐶𝐻 = 1.9%). The data is
taken from [16] and shows the numbers from 20 January
2014.
Website Ranking Globally and USA/DACH
Xing
total
Xing
relative
LinkedIn
total
LinkedIn
relative
Global
331
100%
12
100%
USA
4384
2.6%
8
34.5%
Germany
18
71.2%
24
1.9%
Austria
31
6.3%
n/a
n/a
Switzerland
32
4.6%
n/a
n/a
Table 4 Website ranking
4. COMPARISON OF TRAFFIC
The traffic comparison of both platforms consists of the
bounce rate (percentage of visits that end on the first page
of the website [17]), the page view per visitor, daily time
spent on the website and the percentage of how many
people visit the website from home versus from a company.
The numeral traffic source of Xing is not available but is
presented as over-represented and thus more than 50%.
The bounce rate is significantly higher with Xing. Reasons
might be that there is more communication happening on
LinkedIn, so the user clicks on a new message or general
new notification icon. Another possibility is the abundance
of business news on Xing, leading user to leaving the
website if there are no new notification rather than clicking
on a news headline presented in LinkedIn.
Page views are also higher with LinkedIn. A reason might be
the higher superficiality of LinkedIn compared to Xing as
shown in the features comparison. The more information is
presented on a single website, the less other pages have to
be visited.
The significantly higher traffic source from working places
with Xing provides another explanation for the different
statistics. It is likely that users at a workplace have less time
available to check a website thoroughly resulting in only
quick glances at a website and thus higher bounce rates,
less page views and lower time spent on Xing compared to
LinkedIn.
Traffic Comparison
Xing
LinkedIn
Bounce
38.4%
30.1%
Page views
per Visitor
5.68
8.27
Daily Time
6:31
7:28
Traffic sources
(Home vs. Work)
Work overrepresented
H: 66% W: 34%
[18]
Table 5 Traffic comparison
5. COMPARISON OF DEMOGRAPHICS
5.1 General Demographics
Table 6 shows the demographics consisting of relative
comparisons of the gender and the educational level
measured in members holding a university degree
(undergraduate, postgraduate, Bachelors, Masters). The
relative number in the education row should be treated
carefully, since not all members include the information on
their profile. LinkedIn’s data was calculated by [18],
whereas Xing data was obtained on [19].
Xing
LinkedIn
Gender
M: 48% F: 52%
M: 61% F: 39%
Education
48%
78%
Table 6 General demographics
5.2 Age Demographics
Table 7 shows the age distribution on both networks. It can
clearly be seen how different the age distribution is among
the platforms. Xing shows a concentrated and consistent
peak among the age group of 25 – 54. Combined with the
data from table 8 it can be assumed that most of the
members are entrepreneurs owning small to medium sized
companies that represent themselves on Xing. Young
people such as high schoolers and students don’t seem to
be attracted to the platform.
LinkedIn shows a different demographic situation. The
distribution is less concentrated and while the main group
still consists of 35 – 44 year old members, the young and
very population as well as the older demography are higher.
This is also congruent with the employee count presented
in table 8. The larger the company the higher the possibility
is to show variety in the age demographics, starting with the
intern up to the senior board member. The most interesting
numbers are highlighted to differentiate them from the
rest. The data from table 7 and 8 was obtained from [20]
and shows figures of May 2012.
Age Demographics
6. SUMMARY
Xing
LinkedIn
0 – 17
4%
6%
18 – 24
4%
6%
25 – 34
28%
21%
35 – 44
34%
35%
45 – 54
13%
12%
55 – 64
13%
16%
>65
4%
4%
Table 7 Age demographics
5.3 Employee Counts in Companies
Company sizes go hand-in-hand with age and gender
demographics. The smaller the company, the less diversity
will show. Table 7 shows that Xing is preferred by people
working in small to medium sized companies that make up
46% of the whole membership. There are two spikes in the
range of 1’001 – >10’000 sized companies. Reasons might
be that companies in the DACH region generally tend to be
SME, while there still is a large number of large enterprises
[21], [22].
LinkedIn is strongly concentrated in the >5’001 sized
companies that make up 51% with a spike in the 51 – 200
sized. Since most of the members of LinkedIn are from the
USA it is safe to assume this results from the fact that large
corporations are an important factor in the US economy.
The spike in the 51 – 200 range might result from the trend
that startups prefer LinkedIn over Xing.
Company Sizes
Xing
LinkedIn
Single
5%
3%
1-10
16%
6%
11-50
15%
8%
51-200
15%
11%
201-500
9%
8%
501-1’000
7%
6%
1’001-5’000
13%
6%
5’001-10’000
4%
17%
>10’000
16%
34%
Table 8 Company sizes
Though it is difficult to compare platforms that work in
different geographical regions, it is still possible to draw
conclusions about similarities and differences.
The main interesting fact is that both companies still go
strong within their regions. The specialization works for
both platforms as the numbers of the website ranking
show. Another revelation is that both networks provide
similar functionalities – at least in the paid version – but
with a very different layout and style. Whereas Xing targets
business owners, managers or employees in the DACH
region and provides great search functions for recruiters,
LinkedIn seems a bit more of a social networking and
communication site with media integration, news and more
free functions.
7. FUTURE DEVELOPMENTS
Based on the functionality and geographical, as well as
demographic distribution it might be a possibility for Xing to
gradually move to become an individual job searching and
job advertising platform. The recent acquisition of kununu,
the market leader for employer ratings in the DACH region,
only further proves this point [9].
LinkedIn is on a great path to further strengthen its
position as the leading international business network.
However, both platforms need to update their
functionality and design to the next generation rather
sooner than later.
8. REFERENCES
[1]
"Wikipedia - Professional Network," [Online].
Available:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Professional_network.
[Accessed 21 January 2014].
[2]
Xing, "Geschäftsbericht 2012," Hamburg, 2012.
[3]
"Wikipedia - Xing," [Online]. Available:
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/XING. [Accessed 21 January
2014].
[4]
Xing, "Quartalsbericht III 2013," 2013.
[5]
"Wikipedia - LinkedIn," [Online]. Available:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LinkedIn. [Accessed 21
January 2014].
[13]
"Gründerszene - Start Ups," [Online]. Available:
http://www.gruenderszene.de/news/linkedin-xingstartups. [Accessed 18 November 2013].
[14]
"Statista - Xing," [Online]. Available:
http://www.statista.com/statistics/263570/membernumbers-of-social-network-xing/. [Accessed 21 January
2014].
[15]
"Statista - LinkedIn," [Online]. Available:
http://www.statista.com/statistics/274050/quarterlynumbers-of-linkedin-members/. [Accessed 21 January
2014].
[16]
"Alexa," [Online]. Available: alexa.com. [Accessed
20 January 2014].
[6]
K. Eyres, Interviewee, LinkedIn Europachef Kevin
Eyres über Networking, Wachstum und XING. [Interview].
13 January 2010.
[17]
"Wikipedia - Bounce Rate," [Online]. Available:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bounce_rate. [Accessed 21
January 2014].
[7]
"About LinkedIn," [Online]. Available:
http://press.linkedin.com/about/ . [Accessed 21 January
2014].
[18]
"Quantcast," [Online]. Available:
https://www.quantcast.com/linkedin.com?country=GLOB
AL. [Accessed 18 January 2014].
[8]
"LinkedIn," 12 November 2013. [Online].
Available:
http://help.linkedin.com/ci/fattach/get/2305331/0/filena
me/Compare_Account_Types.pdf. [Accessed 21 January
2014].
[19]
"Social-networking Find the best," [Online].
Available: http://socialnetworking.findthebest.com/l/186/XING. [Accessed 18
January 2014].
[9]
"Gruenderszene," [Online]. Available:
http://www.gruenderszene.de/allgemein/xing-versuslinkedin. [Accessed 18 November 2013].
[10]
"Netzpiloten," [Online]. Available:
http://www.netzpiloten.de/linkedin-vs-xingbeschleunigtes-rennen-um-premium-mitglieder/.
[Accessed 19 November 2013].
[11]
C. Colicchio, I. Demirkaya and A. Hächler, "The
Use of Xing and LinkedIn for Recruitment in Enterprises,"
Olten, 2012.
[12]
"About Xing," [Online]. Available:
https://corporate.xing.com/no_cache/deutsch/unternehm
en/xing-ag/. [Accessed 21 January 2014].
[20]
"Eins-zu-Null," May 2012. [Online]. Available:
http://www.eins-zu-null.com/xing-vs-linkedin. [Accessed
17 January 2014].
[21]
"IT Magazine," [Online]. Available:
http://www.itmagazine.ch/Artikel/54696/KMU_praegen_E
RP-Markt_in_der_DACH-Region.html. [Accessed 21
January 2014].
[22]
"CRM Finder," [Online]. Available:
http://www.crm-finder.ch/expertenbeitraege/detailansicht/article/kmu-im-deutschsprachigen-raum-diehidden-champions.html. [Accessed 21 January 2014].