ECORFAN

Mexico · Member ID: 20793 · 5,131 total works

Global Rank

#2,462

of 28,364

Percentile

Top 9%

of all publishers

View Full Leaderboard

Nearby in Rankings:

#2460Central Scientific Research Institute of Armaments and Military Equipment of Armed Forces of Ukraine(39 pts)#2461Revista ANNEP de Direito Processual(39 pts)#2463Saint-Petersburg University of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation(39 pts)#2464Faculties of Humanities and Theology at Lund University - Swedish Journal of Romanian Studies(39 pts)

Nexus Score

38/ 100

+7 points vs historical

Score Breakdown by Era

Current

Last 2 years

#3,484

1,373 works

Backfile

Older than 2 years

#2,462

3,758 works

Ranked #3,484 for recent publications vs #2,462 overall — recent work trailing historical performance

Dimension Breakdown

Provenance

References, update policies, similarity check

7.0 / 25

People

ORCID coverage

16.1 / 20

Organizations

Affiliations and ROR IDs

6.8 / 15

Funding

Funder registry and award numbers

0.2 / 20

Access

Licenses, full-text links, abstracts

8.2 / 20

Score by Content Type

Scores calculated separately for each content type registered with Crossref. The aggregate score above includes all types.

Content Type	Score	Grade	Prov	People	Orgs	Fund	Access
Journal ArticlesTOP	41	D	42%	82%	44%	1%	38%
Edited Books	15	F	0%	46%	0%	0%	29%
Book Chapters	13	F	0%	44%	0%	0%	23%
Dissertations	5	F	0%	0%	0%	0%	26%
Books	0	F	0%	0%	0%	0%	1%

Non-article content types (reviews, components, corrections) typically have lower metadata coverage, which can reduce the aggregate score above.

Want to compare by content type? The leaderboard supports filtering by content type — use it to see how publishers rank for journal articles, peer reviews, or other types individually.

Detailed Metrics

Metric	Coverage	Points	Status
References provenance	4%	0.6 / 15	Poor
Update Policies provenance	46%	2.3 / 5	Needs Work
Similarity Check provenance	0%	0.0 / 5	Poor
ORCID Coverage people	92%	18.4 / 20	Excellent
Affiliations (Text) organizations	69%	3.5 / 5	Good
ROR IDs organizations	61%	6.1 / 10	Good
Funder Registry funding	4%	0.4 / 10	Poor
Award Numbers funding	0%	0.0 / 10	Poor
Licenses access	68%	4.7 / 7	Good
Full-text Links access	0%	0.0 / 7	Poor
Abstracts access	99%	6.0 / 6	Excellent

Quick Wins to Improve Your Ranking

Small metadata improvements can significantly boost your score. Here are the highest-impact changes you can make:

Improve Funding

+16 pts potential

Include funder information using Open Funder Registry IDs and grant/award numbers.

Current: 1% coverageView Crossref Documentation →

Improve Provenance

+13 pts potential

Add reference lists to your DOI deposits. Even partial references help establish citation links.

Current: 28% coverageView Crossref Documentation →

Improve Access

+8 pts potential

Add abstracts, license URLs (using SPDX identifiers), and full-text links to your metadata.

Current: 41% coverageView Crossref Documentation →

Pro Tip: Focus on your current (recent) publications first. Improving metadata on new deposits is easier than updating backfiles, and it will immediately improve your "current" coverage scores.

ECORFAN

Score Breakdown by Era

Dimension Breakdown

Score by Content Type

Detailed Metrics

Quick Wins to Improve Your Ranking

Improve Funding

Improve Provenance

Improve Access

Improvement Recommendations

Deposit Complete References

Add Funder Information

Add Full-Text URLs

Include Award/Grant Numbers

Enable Similarity Check

About This Score

Crossref Reports

Share Results