Meta-Search Engines

Meta-search engines aren't recommended by search experts

Several search engines pool results from other search engines instead of building their own database of sites. At first glance, these meta-search engines look like big timesavers. However, information specialists such as UC Berkeley librarians recommend against using any of the meta-search engines. Using separate search engines provides much better access to advanced search features.

Another issue is that most meta-search engines, such as Dogpile.com, mix paid listings right in with organic results, and don't distinguish ads with any distinct coloring or box. Paid listings are identified only by faint type. Though Dogpile combines results from the top four search engines (Google, Yahoo!, Live.com and Ask.com), experts warn that the Dogpile results aren't necessarily comparable to what you'd get by using each of these four search engines separately.

Another meta-search engine, Info.com, also draws results from the same four search engines, but it separates the ads in a column on the right. This is a big advantage over Dogpile and Mamma.com, a similar meta-search engine. However, Info.com's advanced search options are very limited compared with those offered at Google and Yahoo! Search.

Jux2.com earned top ranking among meta-search engines back in 2005, based on a survey of users by SearchEngineWatch.com. However, back then, Jux2 put sponsored listings in a separate box. Now they're mixed in with unpaid results, as at Dogpile and Mamma, leaving Info.com as the best of the bunch. For serious research, however, experts still recommend starting with Google, then consulting Yahoo! Search and either Exalead or Live.com.