Is only one of them correct? Are they used in different situations? Or are they interchangeable?
- Anybody can ask a question
- Anybody can answer
- The best answers are voted up and rise to the top
From Strunk and White:
Use "compared with" when you are looking for differences.
E.g. CEO’s now earn 419 times the pay of blue-collar workers, compared with 42 times their pay in the 1980's.
Use "compared to" when highlighting (or comparing) the similarities of one thing to another.
E.g. The human heart can be compared to a pump.
We compare with when we are going to look for differences...My English is better compared with it was in 2013...that is,I can see a difference in my English....
We compare to when we see similarities... Rio De Janeiro City is compared to California... This sentence means that we can find some similarities between Rio De Janeiro and California.
I have always found this distinction to be counterintuitive. "With" suggests closeness, i.e., similarity; while "to" connotes distance, as in "going to".
Therefore, the way I always remember the difference is: They are the opposite of what they should be.
protected by Rathony Feb 28 at 13:54
Thank you for your interest in this question.
Because it has attracted low-quality or spam answers that had to be removed, posting an answer now requires 10 reputation on this site (the association bonus does not count).
Would you like to answer one of these unanswered questions instead?