Facebook and Twitter: Numbers compared

Here at OSM we extol the virtues of infographics to make data more digestible and recent examples have been one about Hootsuite and another about the top searches on Yahoo in 2010. Now we have another for you, this time about Facebook and Twitter.

The sheer size of these social networks can make the numbers involved when talking about their users difficult to put into perspective but a great article by Brad McCarty over on The Next Web contains a really useful infographic from Digital Surgeons with all the statistics. Called Facebook vs. Twitter – a breakdown of 2010 social demographics, the most obvious figure is that of overall users with Facebook on around 500 million and Twitter bringing up the rear with 160 million.

However many more people on Facebook log in every day, a total of 41% compared to only 27% of Twitter users who do so. One statistic that seems to buck the trend is that although more people on Facebook follow a brand, 40% as opposed to Twitters 25%, more users that follow a brand on Twitter end up purchasing that brand, 67% compared to Facebook’s 51%.

The infographic has tons more information as it breaks down figures for gender, age, education and income and makes fascinating viewing so head over to thenextweb.com to take a look. We also wrote last week about how Facebook’s revenue for 2010 could be $2 billion and another article that may interest readers, also from The Next Web, this time by Niall Harbison, asks whether these 2 social media companies are now overvalued.

What are your thoughts on Facebook vs. Twitter? Did any of the statistics on the infographic surprise you? We’d be interested to hear what you have to say so please do send us your comments.

  • Niels Langereis

    Dear Debbie, thank you for pointing me to the nice infographic. Just a little reminder though, in your text you write that Twitter brings up the rear with 160 million users, but in the infographic of Digital Surgeons they talk about 106 million.

  • debbielt

    You're quite right Niels…thank you for pointing it out. That was a typo on my part. Thanks for reading.