For an in depth comparison between Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar, please see this comprehensive table by Iowa State University. A modified version of this table is found below:
Features
|
Scopus
|
Web of Science Core Collection
|
Number of journals
|
21,950
(22,800 if include trade pubs)
|
13,100
(20,556 if include ESCI)
|
Proceedings
|
8 million
|
10.5 million
|
Focus
|
Physical sciences, health sciences, life sciences, social sciences & humanities
|
Science, technology, social sciences, arts and humanities
|
Period Covered
|
1970 to present
|
1945-present; if Century of Science purchased, coverage back to1900
|
Non-English
|
Yes, if has an English abstract; 22% of journals are non-English
|
Yes, if has an English abstract
|
# Published outside North America
|
16,000
|
14,420
(20,420 if include ESCI)
|
Interdisciplinary field coverage
|
Strength
|
Weakness
|
Updated
|
Daily
|
Daily
|
Developer/Producer
|
Elsevier
|
Clarivate Analytics
|
Citation Analysis
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
Mark Records
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
Export Records
|
Yes - en masse
|
Yes - en masse
|
Alerts Service
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
Author Profiles
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
Strengths
|
- Visually stunning author and citation reports
- International and specialized disciplinary coverage
- Includes Altmetrics when available (on abstract page)
- Includes in-press articles
|
- Covers only "journals of influence"
- Coverage back to 1900
- Organization name unification
- Publisher neutral (they are an info provider, not a publisher)
|
Weaknesses
|
- Early reports pointed out weak in social sciences and humanities
- Studies show still weak in sociology and physics/astronomy
- Typographical errors in records
|
- Covers only "journals of influence"
- Difficulty searching unusual author name formats: hyphenated, compound names, umlauts, etc.
- Punctuation issues - e.g., ampersands in journal titles.
|