Monthly Business Blog Rankings from Wikio

Top 20 Business Blogs, according to Wikio, which uses a weighted link based ranking system (see methodology here)

Hat tip Mark J. Perry

Category: Weblogs

Please use the comments to demonstrate your own ignorance, unfamiliarity with empirical data and lack of respect for scientific knowledge. Be sure to create straw men and argue against things I have neither said nor implied. If you could repeat previously discredited memes or steer the conversation into irrelevant, off topic discussions, it would be appreciated. Lastly, kindly forgo all civility in your discourse . . . you are, after all, anonymous.

45 Responses to “Business Blog Rankings: Trumped by Krugman & Sorkin!”

  1. Sircornflakes says:

    If a Blog is too popular, should we be following it? Starts to mimic conventional wisdom in the markets…..hmmm I dunno BH….I just don’t know.

  2. machinehead says:

    Kurgman [sic] is really more of a partisan political commentator who traffics in economic ideology.

    Not in the same category at all — and about two orders of magnitude below TBP in information content.

    If we spend ourselves rich as he advocates, Kurgman hopes to get his mug on the new million-dollar bill.

  3. Excuse me but what does Krugman’s blog have to do with business? I though his blog was all about fantasy and fairy tales?


    BR: Yes, he does politics — but he is a (Nobel-winning) Economist — and about 75% of his posts are macro related

  4. tt says:

    nytimes dealbook.

    isn’t that like the wall st journal and instit investor. a society page of self congratulatory thieves and liars, who have ruined our country.

    where is the oligarch’s blog. wouldn’t krugman and the other thieves love that one. these assholes have done more harm to humanity than stalin.

    i hear mussolini’s italia was a fine place to live, if you were on the right team.

  5. DuchessGateau says:

    BR, your blog eclipsed my other reading starting in 2007, including Krugman. Thank-you, thank-you, thank-you!

  6. JustinTheSkeptic says:

    It just means that Liberals are the only ones that have time to read these days – government jobs, teacher jobs, etc. The rest of us have to work!

  7. JustinTheSkeptic says:

    Machinehead, everyone is seeming to believe that we can, ” spend ourselves rich.” Not only does not the human mind have the ability to think long-term, our political system can’t see past its retina.

  8. JustinTheSkeptic says:

    BR, I have been reading a lot of the headlines today, and if ever there was a time for the old contrarian move this is it…but something “is” different this time. JMHO

  9. wunsacon says:

    JustinTheSkeptic, I’m wondering the same thing, too. The MSM is pretty bearish. Small investors pulled out. Big investors have Fed backing. And the Fed will pump some more. So…?

  10. wunsacon says:

    Sorkin? Is it true he goes easy on Fuld in his book? (I don’t plan to read it.) I saw Sorkin on Bill Maher and was a little disappointed. Bill Black he ain’t.

    I wonder about the NYT’s role, generally. I don’t see them taking chances like, say, Wikileaks. They sometimes write what appear (to me) to be industry-friendly articles. I guess I’m less interested in reading the “paper of record” than reading articles from “champions of truth”.

  11. Reinko says:

    I don’t know if it’s the same in the USA (I am in Europe only clicking on the famous Felix Salmon) but I only get weird stuff from 2 weeks back that is totally irrelevant.

    Try it yourself, the famous Felix is listed at nr 6 and as far as I know the link is:

    And that is number six? Number six on the list?

    The poor Americans…

  12. obsvr-1 says:

    not bad considering PK is a nationally syndicated columnist and ARS has the large print rag as feeder leads to their blogs.

    As for PK’s nobel prize, ever since the nobel peace was awarded to Obama before he did anything has taken much of the luster off that prize for some of the awardees

  13. Reinko says:

    It gets even weirder, number two on the list is DealBook from NYT or so.

    The headline reads: Goldman Said to Plan Closing Prop Trading Desk.

    It is from 03 Sept and has exactly zero comments. That’s what I call a wild blog…

    The link is a little bit long, so I hope it works and you can check there are zero comments in a very famous blog:

    Why is financial blogging so boring suddenly? Who knows?

  14. Broken says:

    @JustinTheSkeptic Says: “everyone is seeming to believe that we can, ” spend ourselves rich.”

    That is your best understanding of Keynsian spending?

  15. How the Common Man Sees It:
    Do you mind explaining how Krugman is full of fantasies and fairy tales?

  16. Reinko says:

    Yes but Krugman gets an awful lot of response and that DealBook nonsense = zero comments.


    BR: Different readerships. Dealbook readers are more likely to be scanning headlines looking for something that might impact their immediate holdings. They have no time to comment . . .

  17. JustinTheSkeptic says:

    Broken, the Keynsian’s of today’s world, or are you wanting to know about who and what John Maynard Kaynes truly believed? He most definitely worried about budgets and their deficits. What we are saying is that the pysdo – keynesians in Washington today only know how to spend and that they have been able to get away with it because of the size that our economy has grown to. And I am betting that with the way that everyone has been buying up bonds at these low interest rates, they are licking their chops on Capital Hill! Let’s face it politics is just another soft science:

  18. alnval says:

    Barry, you’re in a league of your own. The (1), (2) and (3 TBP) on the list are obviously drawn from different universes. IMO this doesn’t make the list ordinal but nominal. Besides, (2 – Sorkin) is like the quarterback who can’t read defenses. Throws great until he gets in the game. Not a good reason to buy that ticket.

  19. mbelardes says:

    I used to read Krugman’s blog a bit until I started following The Big Picture and Calculated Risk.

    My issue with Krugman is he will discuss the data to a point and that point is generally when the data might disagree with him, and then he switches into political points. The idea is he gets you to just infer more data rather than use data to infer points.

    Prime example is his discussion of deficits, debt, stimulus spending, etcetera. He consistently uses moments when the market is tanking and people are buying treasuries to point to the decline in yield and yell “See, there’s no such thing as bond vigilantes!” I don’t have a problem debating the reality or illusion of bond vigilantes, but it’s absurd to use a short-term market downturn and flight to treasuries as a datapoint to claim there are no problems with long term deficits.

    And if you ever meet a liberal (or “progressive” or whatever) that gets all their economic knowledge from Krugman you will see what I mean in about 5 minutes of discussion. He just relentlessly preaches to the choir rather than objectively pursue “the truth” as BR discussed a while back.

    BR leaves most his political perspective at the door and just delivers the data and his factual or inferred points. Krugman puts his political perspective at the forefront and then delivers the data that supports his views, omitting anything that might be contrary.

    BR says “the data shows healthcare is a f*@#ing mess, here are other ways it has been done” and Krugman says “we need national healthcare, here is some data but don’t look at the problems associated with national healthcare…”

    Krugman’s stuff on global trade (for which he won his Nobel) is pretty solid though. I just think he is somewhat of a victim of consumer demand. He gained most of his popularity discussing politics and taking on Bush over the war and tax cuts (not that I disagree) and so he’s going to stick to politics and mix in some macro. I get it.

  20. mbelardes says:

    Oh and congrats to BR. For some reason this turned into a “what do you think about Krugman” comment section.

  21. FrancoisT says:


    It never, ever fails, does it? Despite being a remarkable economist, there are so many people who can’t stand Paul Krugman because he has the “nerve” to talk politics too.

    Like one can separate to two, huh?

    But, I guess it allows a lot of his detractors to avoid focusing on the substance of his arguments.

    Very amusing, to say the least.

    Note: I do disagree with Krugman a fair amount of times. With Mish too; and Mauldin; ditto for Kedroski. But this won’t prevent me to focus on the argument.

    Try it guys; won’t hurt that much.

  22. JustinTheSkeptic says:

    It’s a soft science, which means that no one has to make hard decisions…they can just keep on passing the buck across the isle:

  23. yuan says:


    Wrong link.

    The REAL Felix Salmon blog


    BR: Blame Wikio

  24. Jojo says:

    The 2 blogs at the top of the list might be due to the fact that the NYT has the gross eyeballs because it is backed by the print newspaper, has an awful lot of resources and the content is free.

    But that could all change come January when the NYT puts up its paywall (if they go through with it).

    If the experience of others that have tried to charge for content follows, then the NYT will lose a lot of eyeballs.

  25. RuffRednSore says:

    What? ZeroHedge and BusinessInsider didn’t make the list? What a shock! Maybe they should write less sensational stories on daily basis.


    BR: Wikio’s rankings are no a weighted linking basis. Like Google Scores, the more influential the linker, the bigger the impact. E.G., a NYT/WSJ link is worth more than a group of little known blog links.

  26. Andy T says:


    It’s your world, and we’re just living in it; but, I’m not sure I would want to be on that Top 10 list.

  27. [...] Business Blog Rankings: – Rankings of Business / Economics Blogs [...]

  28. If the criteria is such that ZeroHedge didn’t make such a lengthy list, much less be near the top, then the Wikio ranking is pretty worthless.

  29. “BR: Yes, he does politics — but he is a (Nobel-winning) Economist”



    Now!, w/ Chartporn~!

    LSS: any award that would let [Fama & French] near it, should be held in Suspicion..

    w/that, your pointing to K-man’s ‘Nobel gloss’ might be found, rightly, in the 2nd-link..

    I know it’s a ‘Holiday Weekend’, and all, though, for a ‘Data Realist’, that’s some soft *Thinking.. (;

  30. Joe Friday says:

    Sorkin’s a weenie.

    And for ‘obsvr-1′, the Nobel Prizes have actual criteria, unlike the Nobel Peace Prize, which is largely subjective. Apples and alligators.

  31. d4winds says:

    Congratulations! It’s a great blog. I was surprised that Tyler Cowen’s Marginal Revolution was not more popular.

  32. RW says:

    Interesting: not sure I understand the methodology but am glad to see TBP is well ranked; deserves it.

    I’m not so glad to see Krugman highly ranked since his predictions have been highly reliable but since so many posters here seem to suffer from KDS I’ll hope that reading Krugman and accepting what he says as true still provides an edge.

    Since a victim of KDS can’t think around it I suppose it won’t hurt to also mention that I read Krugman’s wonkish posts religiously because he not only explains major economic and global trading trends in clear language using the same (simplified) macro model in his column he outlines the causal consequences of that model going forward and that’s the way things generally turn out.

    Where I come from, explanatory and predictive power is more science than politics and while these are not market calls by any stretch they can be translated into a strategic investment stance and I have made money in consequence. That’s enough for me.

  33. louis says:

    I wonder what Keynes thought of the Rubber market in 1928?

  34. jdjed says:

    Should DealBook even be considered a blog? The author hitched a ride on the vast coattails of the Gray Lady and evolved into Wall Street’s bitch. There is no discourse in the comments section…yawn, zzzzzzzzzzzz

  35. mbelardes says:


    Not sure who your comment was directed at.

    No problem in discussing politics, in fact, that’s important. It’s when your political bias is the starting point of your analysis that I find to be the problem.

    BR conducts an analysis of the data and then presents his points, occasionally they are political in nature due to the subject matter but at least it was an objectively reasoned point. BR > Krugman but not on the list, unfortunately. All I’m sayin’

  36. jaguar6992 says:

    Personally, I think this is a much more interesting category of blogs w/rankings.

  37. mbelardes says:

    Classic example of what I’m talking about.

    This is Krugman’s game. Deficits never matter because … why … LOOK AT THE WWII ERA!!! ACTUALLY, JUST LOOK AT THIS CHART!!!

    I thought I would have to actually look for an example, I didn’t think I would find one posted as recently as Friday.

    Seeing as his sole point right now is that we should deficit spend to boost the economy, he should discuss this logically. I don’t even dispute a need to deficit spend, I just think it needs to be much much more tactical and the actual risks must be disclosed and weighed appropriately against the perceived benefits. Krugman simply refuses to do this and I can think of no other better example than to point out his utter refute to anything Niall Ferguson says. It’s unfortunate that a leading economist with such strong opinions on policy refuses to rationally address the realities of the policy he subscribes to.

  38. DL says:

    mbelardes @ 1:48

    Massive deficit spending would probably be good for Obama’s political career.

    Once the 2012 election is out of the way, and the bill has to be paid, it’s not going to be so good for the rest of us.

  39. diogeron says:

    The criticism of Krugman is telling. Most of the time when he “does politics”, it involves POLICY related to matters economic and his point of view, for example his argument from a Keynesian perspective that the stimulus was too small and that making 1/3 of the stimulus small business tax cuts wouldn’t help that much. In fact, advocating one’s POV is very much like what Larry Kudlow does every day on CNBC from the Austrian school perspective. The primary difference between the two is that Krugman’s column in the NYT is labeled “opinion” and Kudlow is supposedly a broadcast journalist. Oh yeah, and Krugman has a Nobel Prize in economics and Kudlow has is a track record of advocating the complete deregulation of the mortgage business, policies which contributed to the housing meltdown.

  40. Broken says:

    In a recession, deficit spending on infrastructure works great. The government can borrow money cheaply, get good prices on infrastructure projects, employ under-utilized construction workers, and have little impact on inflation. This is good deficit spending.

    In an expansion, deficit spending works poorly. Government borrowing is expensive, infrastructure projects are more costly due to competition with private construction projects, and is inflationary. This is terrible deficit spending.

    Therefore, governments should cut back spending and run surpluses during a boom (during peacetime anyway) so they can increase spending and run deficits during a recession. The result is cheaper infrastructure (which needs to be invested in sooner or later), less government debt financed at lower cost, and lower inflation.

    Unfortunately, we have been running deficits during both booms and busts (except during the late 90s). So, now we are in a position where the conventional wisdom is to reduce spending during a recession.

    Exactly anti-Keynesian.

  41. mbelardes says:


    Exactly. And the perpetual deficit spend for a boom crowd is called Republicans and Democrats. The GOPers talk about balancing the budget as if Reagan isn’t the one that kicked us off on the deficit binge in the first place with Dubya kicking it into overdrive.

    Fiscal Policy should be run through a Federal Reserve-type governmental organization that is (mostly) shielded from political influence. GDP running at a high clip? Time to raise taxes and trim spending? Yes? But the politician has zero incentive to piss off the the voters, regardless of party. Republicans want low taxes. Democrats want public spending. Both sides are obliged to provide both to keep their relative power share rather than face a “toss everyone out” situation. Ironically they are now facing that.

    My idea is you have the Treasury or CBO give Congress the tax rates, spending allowance, and max borrowing for the year and let them fight over what to do with it. Why let these guys gut taxes and spend to the trillions on waste? That is inefficiency to the highest degree.

    But we’d need an Amendment. Never going to happen. Oh well. Back to lazy Sunday…

  42. Joe Friday says:


    “Krugman simply refuses to do this and I can think of no other better example than to point out his utter refute to anything Niall Ferguson says.”

    Ferguson is a wanker who has been repeatedly wrong, and Krugman has repeatedly elucidated how Niall and his fellow travelers have been wrong.

    Here’s a good laugh:



  43. Investradamus says:

    Zero Hedge not only didn’t make the top 20, but doesn’t appear anywhere on this top 100 list. Didn’t expect to see that.

  44. Investradamus says:

    Zero Hedge didnt make the cut anywhere on this top 100 list?