SEO Keywords & Conversions – How an ‘ or – Can Make You Seven Figures!

SEO Keywords & Conversions – How an ‘ or – Can Make You Seven Figures!

There’s a big difference in following proper English and grammar guidelines, and creating a proper experience for your end users.

A professional writer will write a word to follow guidelines created many years ago.  That is the issue.  There is a set structure which is not updated to meet current usage and regular standards.

Using common spoken versions instead of the “technically correct” versions is one of the ways I help my clients bring in more traffic and increase conversions, but only when it is appropriate.

Google does tend to prefer proper grammar and english, but it isn’t always the best experience for your user base (customers, readers, subscribers, leads, etc…).  That is why situationally we break from branding and corporate guidelines and do what is right for the end users.  By doing this in these situations we can increase traffic and increase conversions.

Finding the right balance should be your goal as a business owner, marketer and content creator.

Below are a few examples with explanations of these.

You can find these same terms and phrases using Google keyword tools as well as your own site search depending on how much traffic your website has.  I have the advantage of having some high volume websites as clients.  These are all based on campaigns and niches I have worked on for various clients in the past, but not the actual data or examples.

(please note I’m not comparing specific apples to specific apples in each example.  But I am keeping it in the family like a red delicious vs. a golden delicious, or a granny smith to a honeycrisp.  They are each to demonstrate a specific technique or SEO and conversion tactic).  

Example 1: Mother’s Day vs. Mothers Day

Mother’s Day is only 31 days away so I’ll start with this.  Browser’s and many writing tools will autocorrect Mothers Day to have an ” ‘ ” symbol before the “s”.  But if you look up the search volumes, the non apostrophe version has more traffic.

If you’re a blogger or content creator who does not have to deal with a branding team, this is an opportunity to capitalize where big brands cannot.

Bonus tip – One thing I’ve also seen in different niches is that the ‘s version can lead to different themes and topics.  Instead of a shopping page or review, a listcicle could be the better experience.  Checkout the double bonus tip in the next section for an even better one!  

Group 1: without the apostrophe

Keyword Volume
mothers day gifts 201000
mothers day gift 74000
mothers day gift ideas 60500
best mothers day gifts 12100
good mothers day gifts 9900

You’ll see “best mothers day gifts” above has 12,100 searches but “best mother’s day gifts” has 6,600.  That’s a big difference in traffic and sales!

Group 2: with the apostrophe

Keyword Volume
best mother’s day gifts 6600
last minute mother’s day gifts 4400
top 10 mother’s day gift ideas 4400
mother’s day delivery gifts 2900

Example 2: Microneedling vs. Micro-needling vs. Micro Needling

The spelling here and also capitalization make a difference.  If your audience uses two words and capitalizes both, using this on your website could make it more relatable to them.  But it might not follow brand standards or trademarks.  The added benefit here is that you’re speaking your customers’ language.

Although it may be incorrect.  A single word vs. two words or a hyphenated version can also have a substantial impact on the traffic levels.  Look below to see the monthly search volumes for each.

Bonus tip – I found a slight skew when working on a project for these phrases where the end user for one of the variations in particular also wanted “vampire facials” and assumed they are the same.  By combining vampire facials into the page we are able to let the end user know they found the right place and it may or may not have lead to an increase in conversions by adding the service in.

Double Bonus tip – Use Google Auto Suggest and also the “People Also Ask” to determine if these phrases are shopping ready, research phase, or just interested in what it is.  This will determine where the version of the content should go and the formatting of the page.  

Group 1: single word spelling

Keyword Volume
microneedling 135000
microneedling near me 14800
microneedling at home 12100
what is microneedling 9900
microneedling benefits 6600
microneedling cost 6600
microneedling pen 5400

The interesting thing to note between these two is that microneedling as one word is about a product and a service.  When it is split into two words it is about the results of and questions about a microneedling procedure.

This level of detail and research is exactly what you need to determine where to use which versions, how to relate to your current and prospective customers (or readers) and how to phrase your offering.

Group 2: two word spelling

Keyword Volume
micro needling side effects 1600
micro needling results how long 720
micro needling at home reviews 480
micro needling depth chart 480
micro needling for pitted scars 390
micro needling after one treatment 320

Example 3: A Modifier Makes a Big Difference

This example combines both of the above into a big ticket term, tshirts.  You’ll see examples with the apostrophe as well as single vs double words, and spellings.

Group 1: modifier one word

Keyword Volume
black tshirt 12100
black tshirt dress 2900
black tshirt women 1000
black tshirt for men 880
mens black tshirt 590

Group 2: modifier two words

Keyword Volume
black t shirt 22200
black t shirt mens 5400
black t shirt dress 3600
black t shirt women 3600

Group 3: modifier two words different spelling

Keyword Volume
black tee shirt 2900
black tee shirt dress 590
black tee shirt womens 390

There are some huge differences here.  Group one has less search volume than group two, but the modifiers begin to change as the longtail versions develop.  This is where you need to match your onsite search.  Which version do your customers use the most.

If your customers always want a tshirt vs. a t shirt, you may be able to relate to them better and bring more qualified traffic in.  The buyer base also changes substantially.

In the second group “black lives matter” began populating with a higher search volume than in the first group, and more frequently.  This could be a sign that a portion of the 22,200 monthly searches is not relevant to a plain black t shirt so you may want deduct that search volume.

Basically, if you sell black t shirts but not black lives matter t shirts, then that portion of the searches are not relevant for your store because you do not carry the products.  This is why this search volume should be subtracted from the main number.

In this case, the total search volume for t shirt as two words is still higher than the numbers in group 1 so version two is better volume wise, but not necessarily user experience wise.

Something interesting in the third group with tee vs. t is that girls appears to be one of the larger search volumes.  To verify if this is a thing, and you sell kids and adult tshirts, you will want to search for other color, style and size variations.  If it holds true, you may want to use “tee” instead of “t” in the kids sections and “t” instead of “tee” in the adults.

Branding will likely throw a temper tantrum over consistency here, but guess what, this is a business and businesses need money to pay for the branding.  This is how you grow sales and the business, it is also one of the ones I end up pushing for much harder because it is a bigger win.

Keyword research for SEO isn’t just about volume.  It is finding the right versions of keywords that your audience will use, and knowing when, where and which format to use them in.  This is what makes the difference in your bottom line, even if they are technically not correct.

Content Freshness: Is it a Google Ranking Factor?

Content Freshness: Is it a Google Ranking Factor?

Content freshness is an important Google ranking factor that is overlooked by many content creators and marketers.

Google scores freshness by using its QDF (query deserves freshness) algorithm to determine whether or not a particular piece of content is relevant for a specific search query that requires up-to-date search results.

According to recent data, many companies under-invest in the content updates/freshness aspect of SEO which leads to them experiencing mediocre results in their marketing.

The graph below shows that, in addition to content freshness, content quality/relevance and backlinks are also ignored by most companies – and these are all things that can be solved by implementing an effective strategy for maintaining content freshness (as you will discover below).

Source

This article takes an in-depth look at content freshness as a Google ranking factor. Read on to find out everything you need to know to help you leverage the power of fresh content in boosting your rankings and growing your business.

Understanding Content Freshness

Fresh content refers to content that was published recently, has been recently updated, or that is updated frequently.

There are many different schools of thought when it comes to the topic of content freshness.

Some SEOs and content strategies consider content freshness to be an SEO best practice. They believe that updating your content frequently helps it get crawled more often, and therefore rank better in Google and other search engines.

Others argue that fresh content doesn’t necessarily result in better rankings in the search engine results pages, but that better-optimized content will perform better in the SERPs.

But what does the data say?

  • Does Google crawl fresh content more frequently?
  • Are rankings impacted by crawl frequency?
  • Does content freshness matter more in certain industries than others?

These are all questions to consider when looking at content freshness as a Google ranking factor.

Why Content Freshness Is Important

Content freshness is vital because searchers need to see results that are recent and relevant. And since Google’s main objective is to provide users with the best possible experience, that is the type of content that the search engine will want to serve them with.

Google’s algorithm allows it to differentiate the different levels of freshness that users need for each of their queries.

For instance, when searching for information on a current event, you may be presented with content ranking at the top of the results page that was published just minutes ago. This means that in order to answer your query, Google’s algorithm determined that age was less important than recency.

What do Experts Say?

Approximately 70% of marketers state that regularly publishing relevant content is the most effective tactic for search engine optimization. According to some of the leading experts online, there are many reasons why content freshness is considered a Google ranking factor.

For one, if the searcher needs fresh content in order to find value, then your rankings on Google will be impacted by the freshness of your content and if the content isn’t fresh, rankings may drop.

Here is what some experts in the digital marketing niche have to say on the issue of content freshness as a Google ranking factor:

What Moz Experts Say

According to Moz experts, there are many different ways in which fresh content may influence your Google rankings, including the following:

  • Freshness based on the inception date of the webpage. The inception date is the date when Google first became aware of the page, such as when the bots first discovered a link to or indexed the document.
  • The number of changes made on the updated content. For instance, if you only change 10% of your document, it won’t have as much impact as updating over 50% of your document.
  • How much of the changes made were to the core areas of the document. Changes made to important areas of a document signal more freshness than those made to less important areas, such as comments, navigation, date/time tags, JavaScript, and so on.

What Search Engine Land Experts Say

According to an article from SearchEngineLand.com, Google’s new algorithm helps to make search results fresher in order to provide more relevant results.

The ranking algorithm now shows fresher results faster – something that impacted over 35% of searches and more efficiently determines when to give users more up-to-date and relevant results for the different degrees of content freshness.

It’s clear that search engines love timely, up-to-date, and fresh information.

But, it’s important to keep in mind that while content freshness is important, it doesn’t mean that you can win by making minor changes to the pages on your site, or by publishing lots of new, low-quality pages just to get that freshness boost.

You will only be able to harness the power of fresh content to increase your visibility and ranking by creating high-quality content that is focused on fully satisfying the user’s intent.

How I Approach Content Freshness

I believe that content freshness matters when it comes to ranking on Google. This is especially true when updating old content.

I’ve personally run A/B tests on my websites in an effort to understand how pages are impacted by freshness and in most cases, I’ve seen a positive correlation between updating content and ranking increases.

Below, I have outlined my personal process for ensuring that content freshness has a positive influence on my SEO.

1. Rank Content First

As previously mentioned, one of the ways that Google determines content freshness is by the inception date of the page. In other words, the search engine looks at the dates when it first became aware of the content. That’s why it’s important to rank content first before focusing on revisions.

After your content has been ranked, it’s freshness score may give it a boost for specific search queries, but it will obviously decay over time. As your content becomes older, you can then use revisions and updates as a way to maintain content freshness.

The bottom line is that with all other factors being equal, freshness degrades over time which makes the content less successful for some particular queries.

It’s also important to note that in some cases, older documents could be more favorable for a search query than newer ones, as evidenced in the graph below.

Source

Because of this, it may be beneficial to adjust the content freshness score of a webpage based on the difference of its age compared to the average age of the content in the results page.

2. Review Analytics and Google Search Console Monthly

Yet another approach I use to help maintain the freshness of my content is by reviewing Google search console and analytics every month. It’s important to watch analytics trends to see how they are positively or negatively moving.

Traffic and engagement are two popular metrics that can be used to signal freshness. When Google displays a list of results in response to a search query, the results chosen by the user, as well as the amount of time they spend on the result, are both good indicators of relevance and freshness.

For instance, if users consistently choose and click on a search result that is further down the results page, and if they spend a lot more time engaged with the content on that page compared to other results – including the ones at the top, Google sees this as a sign that the result is more relevant and fresher than the rest.

This can be interpreted to mean that the click-through rate (CTR) of a page is a ranking factor – although that is not always the case.

The bottom line is, if a web page is returned for a specific query and users with the same or similar queries spend more time on average on that document, Google can use this as an indication that the document is fresh and therefore rank it higher in the SERPs.

This is why it’s crucial to review your analytics and Google search console monthly so you can keep an eye on the analytics trends to see how they are moving.

3. Revise Content Quarterly

The rate at which you change your documents is important when it comes to content freshness. If the content on your website is changed more frequently, it will score differently than content that is only changed every few years.

That’s why I like to revise content quarterly. I use Google Search Console to review Impression and click data, but also pay close attention to average position and impressions to confirm that the phrases haven’t simply lost search volume due to seasonal searches or users searching less.

I’ve taken up this practice in the last year and, generally speaking, it has helped me make more money blogging than most of the other tactics I’ve learned over the years.

4. Revise/Publish Articles Completely

Another effective way I use for ensuring content freshness is to revise the articles in full and republish them as new. For this, don’t forget to use proper tools for your blog so that you can update everything easily depending on what platform you’re on.

This signals to Google that a major revision has been done and will earn you a much higher freshness score than simply revising or updating some of the information on the page.

Although changes to core content are important, you will get a stronger signal of content freshness by revising and republishing the articles completely.  On a side note, I also like to use a social media scheduling tool to push my content out on Social after publishing.  While I don’t have any data showing that this improves ranking, it’s just something I like to do to signal a share soon after the revisions I completed.

According to a recent report from Social Media Examiner, over 58% of marketers state that original written content ranks among the most important types of content for experiencing high ROI from their marketing efforts.

This is not surprising when you consider the vast benefits that come with using fresh, original, high-value content:

Source

5. Submit to Google Search Console

The final step I take toward ensuring the freshness of the content on my site is to submit the revised articles to Google Search Console to have them recrawl the content and potentially rank it higher in the SERP.

Once you have completed this step, you can then market your content like it’s fresh and keep an eye on how Google sees your site and the different ways you can optimize your content to achieve even higher rankings on the search engine.

Summary

Freshness is a ranking factor that is dependent on the specific query of the user. This means that it’s deemed more important in some search queries than others.

When it’s important for users to see recent news, freshness plays a major role. For instance, if someone were to Google “latest developments in coronavirus vaccine” Google knows that the user will want to see the most recent news.

However, in other instances, freshness plays a less important role. For instance, if someone Google’s “how to tie a bow tie”, Google knows that guides written 10 years ago may still be as good as one that was written yesterday since the process of tying a bow tie hasn’t changed in the last decade.

So if your content is for satisfying a query that isn’t time-sensitive, then this ranking factor may not be such a big deal.

The best way to leverage the power of content freshness as a Google ranking factor is to look at various search results for your target keywords in order to assess how important freshness is for each one.

If freshness is important for a particular keyword, you can choose between updating the page frequently or publishing new articles on the topic on a consistent basis in order to keep up with demand.

On the other hand, if freshness is of very little importance, you can focus your efforts on creating the best guide on that topic and then update or refresh the content when rankings begin to drop.

BYLINE:

Ron Stefanski is an online entrepreneur and marketing professor who has a passion for helping people create and market their own online business.  You can learn more from him by visiting OneHourProfessor.com 

You can also connect with him on YouTube or Linkedin or in his Facebook Community.

What Scraping & Analyzing 1.1 Million Search Results Taught Us About The Way Google Ranks Your Content in 2019

What Scraping & Analyzing 1.1 Million Search Results Taught Us About The Way Google Ranks Your Content in 2019

If the scientific community took a deep look into the SEO industry, they’d probably laugh so hard that a couple of them would probably die from a stroke.

Despite the fact that the industry is maturing at this point. Most SEO rules are merely based on anecdotal evidence.

… or theories some well followed guru came up with based on a 6 years old Matt Cutts’ tweet.

So we wanted to do what we can to try to level things up and bring actual data to the table, especially after the recent batch of huge updates that came to Google’s core algorithm.

Be kind, this is our first shot at it but we have been building a custom crawler for this post just to analyze 1.1 million search results and share our findings here (wow, just writing this, I can tell this made a looot of business sense).

one part of the custom crawler we built for this post

Here’s a summary of what we’ve learned:

  • The top position is most likely to be the most relevant result. If there is an obvious result (like a brand), Google will show it, even if it goes against all other ranking factors and SEO rules.
  • For less obvious results (i.e. non-branded keyword searches) Featured Snippets are taking over. 50-65% of all number one spots are dominated by a Featured Snippets.
  • In other words, this is the area where most SEO competition happens. Google is heading towards more immediate answers and fewer clicks on SERPs.
  • Because of these 2 things, lot of the actual SEO competition happens at the second and third place nowadays.
  • Backlinks, measured by the number of referring domains to a URL are still the most strongly correlated factor for SEO success.
  • Some of the popular link authority metrics like Ahrefs Rank or Domain Rating have shown to be less correlated in our study than we expected.
  • Keywords matter. Both the number of keywords in the content and keyword density. Keywords in URL proved somewhat relevant. Keywords in metas, h1 and title tags showed much stronger correlations.
  • While longer content does correlate with higher ranks, it’s sensible to think the length is not the factor – rather it provides a room for more keywords to be inserted at a non-spammy density.
  • It’s better to optimize for the parent topic (highest volume keyword the top result ranks for) than the actual keyword it covers. All high ranked results dominated the “parent topic” over the keyword they ranked for.
  • HTTPS is now a must to rank. No news here, Google made it clear already.
  • Some of the SEO hearsay proved completely invalid. For example, the rumor that Google treats high volume keywords differently or that it holds a preference for content with embed YouTube over other video platforms.
  • Some well-established beliefs might just be a result of bad data science in previous studies. For example, the length of the URL being a strong ranking factor.
  • All first page results show a high average score (over 90%) for Google’s Lighthouse Audits (SEO), but no link was found between higher scores and top ranks.
  • Page Speed seems to help, but not as much as expected. You should want your pages to load fast, for various other reasons anyway.
  • Needs further study: Some results on page two mimic the metrics of the top results on page one – there seems to be a thin line between doing everything right and appearing spammy.

Keep reading to learn more details about the findings …

About This Study

In short, for this study, we pulled out 120,000 random keywords from Google Keyword Planner, half of which we made sure get at least 1000 searches a month.

We then got top 10 SERP results for each and pulled additional data from Ahrefs (such as domain rating), Google APIs and our own custom-built crawlers.

Overall, we ended with quite a rich dataset of some 1.1 million SERP results. The details of how this study was done and example of data we worked with can be found here.

This is the tech stack we used to gather the data

Existing Studies, What’s Out There

Naturally, before getting started with this we had a look at what studies have been done in the past. Surprisingly, not so much.

What’s done, either comes out as a study released by one of the SEO data vendors like Ahrefs (who are doing a great job) or a third party analysis of the data donated by vendors, such as this 2016 study by Backlinko, which served as our inspiration for this piece but felt a little outdated given the massive algorithm changes we have had in 2018 and 2019.

Then you have something like Moz’s annual survey of SEO pros, where they report their day-to-day experience. All of these we found valuable to help us get started.

The rest of what you find is based on hearsay, anecdotal evidence, analysis of Matt Cutts’ past blog posts and tweets and recycled findings from the past studies.

Obviously, we were excited to do this.

Limitations and Challenges of Our Study

It was quite an eye-opening experience working with so many data points and we ran into many challenges.

Those were some tricky things that would get results that seemed perfectly fine but were actually invalid or unreliable. The eye-opening part was that a great deal of what we know about SEO may come from such results.

For example, when dealing with such a large set of random keyword data (100,000 in this case) you are going to get a lot of branded keywords there.

That means comparing the results of the first rank with the rest will yield very different results as with branded keywords Google won’t care much about the small SEO factors like HTTPS or page speed when there’s one obvious answer to the query.

As a result, the average of rank one stats will often look very different to everything that ranks below.

This is something that has also shown up in other people’s case studies like Ahrefs or Backlinko. Often the effectiveness of SEO can be seen on the aggregate data from rank two and three results.

Or another example – a great deal has been written about how shorter URLs lead to better ranking and it’s been backed by past studies.

Well, if you work with aggregate results and diverse keywords, it’s more likely the higher ranks will be for the actual homepages, without a suffix, because they’re relevant to specific keywords and would rank for the query anyway, not because they have a short URL.

In other words, for many keywords, you’re more likely to find something like www.website.com among the higher ranks while something like www.website.com/top-ten-something yielding a shorter average length.

We’ve done our best to filter a lot of such statistical noise out.

OK, so here are the actual findings….

#1 It’s still worth fighting for the #1 Spot

Ever heard of Pareto Rule? It’s the idea that a great majority of results in any area come from the “vital few” – many internet blogs have written about it.

Well, first of all, Pareto was an economist and the Pareto Rule is an economic concept. And the world of business and economics seems to be dominated by this rule.

For example, 99% of apps in the mobile app stores make no or little money while all the billions go to the top 1%. Or 95% of retail securities market investors barely break even.

Organic Traffic And Google Search Rank

On average top result gets the 40% of aggregate organic traffic. For keywords that matter (i.e. >1000 searches a month) the figure goes up to 47%.

It’s the same with SEO. The number one ranks dominate the market leaving the rest pretty much in the dust.

That is not only due to the fact that the #1 result is #1 for the keyword we looked at. It is also because the #1 result ends up ranking for way more keywords on average.

And its #1 ranking makes it gain more organic links which reinforces its position. It’s a virtuous circle.

From time to time I come across some “alternative facts” and SEO ideas like that you should aim for the spot number two or three in an assumption that most people skip the first result in distrust.

Looking at the organic traffic we obtained from Ahrefs, it doesn’t seem to be the case.

Conclusion: It’s worth fighting for the #1 spot when you are on the first page for a keyword. Often moreso than battling for new keywords if you have a fighting chance.

Overall, 46% of the top positions in our study were occupied by a SERP feature. For keywords that get a decent amount of searches, the figure was slightly higher at about 48%.

Serp Feature Example

If you’re an SEO, this is not the most relevant figure.

Basically, with branded keywords, there’s no need for a SERP feature if searching it can yield a very specific result such as a particular Amazon page.

So, after we stripped the results of likely branded queries, the results jumped to 65.5%.

That is a lot more than the 12.29% Ahrefs found in mid 2017 even considering a healthy margin of error.

In other words, for non-branded keywords, the number one rank is getting replaced by an immediate answer.

Featured Snipped SERP Feature In Search Results

What this means is that there’s a clear shift towards Google monopolizing the traffic and its users may end up getting immediate answers, never clicking on the links and reducing the overall volume of organic traffic over time.

Our advice here is to optimize your page so you end up in one of those SERP features.

Hubspot did a case study on this and showed that, for large queries, when they  did appear in the featured snippets, their page was getting a higher CTR than when they did not.

Ideally, you’d want to occupy the second rank as well as optimize towards attracting traffic in the new SERP feature dominated world. For example, by having a strong title.

Conclusion: We are heading towards featured snippets dominated search results and there is nothing you can do about it. Don’t just optimize with an aim to become one, aim to be the first “classic” organic result as well.

#3 HTTPS Matters, But Relevance Beats it

There’s nothing new here, Google has been pushing for HTTPS for quite a while. There’s been a threat of losing ranks and Chrome will literally call your site insecure if you don’t have an active SSL certificate.

So far, well over 90% of the page one results already have HTTPS which shows most sites have now transitioned to SSL and Google is rewarding them for it.

The #1 ranking, however, has a lower correlation most likely due to that relevance factor we mentioned earlier.

That’s simply because if you search something like “child support center” from an IP in Ohio, Google will place the website of the local child support center at the top of the page, regardless of whether they have an SSL certificate or not.

For such queries, we found out that neither HTTPS nor any other SEO factors play a huge role.

Conclusion: Secure your site with HTTPS if you haven’t done it yet. Whatever the results of this study, Google made their direction clear and you will probably suffer the consequences if you delay this more.

There’s no news here. Backlinks remain the most important ranking factor.

We measured the total number of referring domains pointing to the URL and that yielded the highest correlations with top ranks.

At this point, we can only talk about quantity and IP diversity being a factor. (I believe Ahrefs has done some more extensive research into backlink profiles, but I couldn’t find it again).

Number Of Referring Domains And Google Search Rank

Chart: While the average number of backlinks per SERP changed depending on the dataset (high-volume keywords vs. all, includes branded vs. non-branded) the ratio remained the same for all the analyses we performed.

Right now I tend to believe, that when SEOs talk about factors like length of content or presence of an image they may not be factors Google considers at all, but simply happen to correlate with a higher quality content that gets linked to.

We’ve looked at other popular metrics too, like Ahrefs Rank and found no correlation. Domain Rating seemed to be somewhat relevant.

Conclusion: Spend more time building content that gets linked to, instead of reading all those SEO guides and articles.

#5 URL Length and Keywords in URL

The current belief in the SEO industry is that the length of the URL impacts the rank. The previous studies have also correlated higher search ranks with exact match of the keyword in the URL.

URL Suffix Length And Google Search Rank

We also found the same correlations but were suspicious about it. It’s just logical that the higher you go in the search ranks the shorter the URL is going to be as you’ll be getting more results for the homepage with no suffix, and short category pages.

When using a large sample of keywords, a few of such results will dramatically impact the average length.

With the presence of keywords, it’s a slightly different story. Take a look at two URL examples below.

  • www.mywebsite.com/protein-bars-vegan-athletes
  • www.mywebsite.com/vegan-protein/

Let’s say you want to rank for a keyword “vegan protein bars.” The standard advice is to use a suffix like the latter example, i.e. /vegan-protein/.

When looking for an exact match in the URL suffix, in general, we found no correlation.

If we included the root domain, the top few would stand out with higher numbers so it’s sensible to assume the keywords in the root domains (or subdomains) seem to be somewhat relevant despite what Google says.

Now let’s say the keyword we look at is “vegan protein bars.” When we tokenized the keyword as follows “vegan,” “protein,” “bar” and simply counted the occurrence of these we found a much stronger correlation.

With this method, the first, longer URL would be more likely found higher in the search ranks.

Conclusion: I think URL length and keywords in it bear much smaller significance than generally believed. Even with some correlations, looking at all the results we’ve got the case isn’t that convincing.

It might, however, be a good practice to keep it short and concise, but long enough to feature all the important words in high-volume keywords you want to rank for.

#6 Keywords in Meta, Title Tags, H1 Tags, etc.

We managed to crawl 90% of the entire 1.1 million URLs dataset (the other 10% blocked our request or somehow weren’t accessible for crawlers).

We found a much stronger correlation for keywords in meta descriptions, H1 and Title tags than we did in the URL analysis. In fact, we can take it for a fact that Google looks at these, as their Lighthouse audit tool makes it relatively clear that they matter.

In each case, there was a quite solid correlation for the keyword we got the ranks for, but even stronger for the parent topic.

Keywords In H1 And Google Rank

In fact, parent topic keywords (the highest volume keyword the top result ranks for – read more about this metric here) were as much as twice more likely to show up in these properties.

This encouraged us to look more at the parent topic when looking at keyword presence for the next tests to see just how valuable it is for SEO’s.

One thing that I noticed looking at the actual list of Parent topics though is that they are often shorter tail versions of the keyword we were analyzing which explains why they often beat the actual keyword in correlation.

Conclusion: Optimize these properties for your keyword, but don’t forget to aim at the parent topic in the first place. We measured exact match in this analysis by the way.

#7 Content-Length and Content Keywords

There’s a strong belief in the SEO industry that longer content delivers higher ranks, or that Google somehow prefers long-form content.

There’s also a general belief that the optimal content length for SEO is at around 2000 words. While the study did find the correlation for content length, I tend to disagree with the general view.

First of all, any bigger study will have a hard time to precisely assess the length of content, unless done manually. Web scrapers tend to grab elements that don’t belong in the word count and inflate the numbers.

Things like comment sections, side navigation and author boxes.

Other times, the studies published on this topic would come from software companies that have their business in content marketing and thus they’ll be biased to tell you that longer content is better.

Content Length And Google Search Rank

For this study, we tried a bunch of different solutions and finally settled on one built around Readability library that powers the reader view in Firefox browser as it was by far the best at isolating content and removing navigation, comments etc.

While we found a beautiful correlation for word count the overall content length was shorter than generally believed once you strip much of the noise more generic scrappers tend to pick up.

But here’s the most exciting finding.

Keyword And Parent Topic Count : Google Search Rank

For top results, the keyword would appear on average 5.7 times in the readable text (e.g. article body) and 17.2 for parent topic. That’s about 3 times more when compared with rank 12 results.

Keyword count showed beautiful correlation too. On average, we found the keyword appeared in the readable text six times.

What’s more exciting is that the parent topic would appear in the readable part of the text almost 3 times as more often as the keyword we pulled the SERPs for.

Another interesting thing is that the density of keywords correlates too, in spite of higher ranks having a longer average word count.

Conclusion: What that leaves us with, is that it may not be the length of content that affects your SEO as much as it allows you to show Google more keywords while maintaining some credible density.

In other words, if you don’t optimize your content for keywords, the length of content won’t help much. (Unless it’s so good that the sheer quantity of its value makes more sites linking to you).

#8 Lighthouse Audit and PageSpeed Insights

Finally, we wanted to have a look at page speed and whatever else was accessible using Google’s API tools.

A great deal has been said about how speed is critical for SEO.

Some correlations were found in the past, but they usually came from sources like Alexa. I assume because it’s the cheapest and the easiest way to get some additional data.

We considered Alexa too, but many users report inaccurate data, so we turned to Google’s own PageSpeed Insights tool, a much costlier way to obtain data.

This tool gives you an overall score for a URL, looking at a number of factors, including speed, overall performance, SEO best practices, and mobile optimization.

A few months ago, it has been updated with the latest version of the Lighthouse audit tool. It contains an SEO audit which looks at the following points and scores them:

  • Document has a valid `rel=canonical`’
  • Document has a `

While we learned that on average over 90% of all pages comply with all points, there was no correlation between the high rank and higher scores. In fact, it seemed slightly inverted.

Then we looked at the page speed results. We looked at:

  • First Input Delay (FID): the time from when a user first interacts with your site to the time when the browser is able to respond.
  • First Contentful Paint (FCP): the time from navigation to the time when the browser renders the first bit of content from the DOM.
  • … and overall speed.

The results are that the top ranked pages are slightly faster, but most scored AVERAGE or SLOW overall, and AVERAGE for FID and FCP.

Conclusion: It seems to be a good practice to optimize with the updated PageSpeed Insights, but don’t expect miracles for your rankings and don’t sacrifice premium user experience and functionalities for a few points of pagespeed.

Obviously, there are numerous other reasons why you’d want your page to be fast – such as better conversions and lower bounce rates.

#9 Other Observations

All of the above are just the interesting or mention-worthy findings we obtained from the study. However, we looked at a bunch of things while conducting it.

For example, we wanted to see if the presence of a video in the content has any impact on SERPs or whether it’s true that Google prefers pages using YouTube to other video platforms.

None of these assumptions proved valid. At least not in our analysis.

We also assumed the rumor that Google runs a different algorithm for high-volume keywords is true, and ran each analysis on different volumes separately, only to find similar results every time.

Finally, the most interesting thing to see, and something Authority Hacker observed before too, often time the top results on page two seem to show similar metrics to actual top ranked pages.

For example, similar keyword density, Ahrefs Domain Rank, HTTPS prevalence, and so on. Yet, they’ve never made it to page one.

It seems, there are some credibility issues (maybe EAT?) or a thin line between doing things right and coming across as spammy exists in Google’s algorithm.

Final Conclusion

After looking at these results, I think a lot of people have the interest in making SEO seem overly complicated to maintain a guru status.

I do believe a lot of the little technicalities like keyword in url or page speed are important for extremely competitive queries where 1% advantages can make the difference.

But in most cases, they are not as impactful as most people think.

The study has proved once again that Google does a great job at establishing relevance and when there’s a clear choice it pays little attention to the technical aspects of SEO.

You could already observe this in Backlinko’s study from 2016 – notice how the first rank always shows lower scores in most charts.

For all the content where SEO does play a role, I think the answer is straightforward. Do your keyword research, build a unique, highly-valuable piece of content and promote it so you get links.

Have a clean site both from the technical perspective and user experience perspective and you should be good to go.

It gets a bit more challenging when your sites become very large and you need to organise content in a logical way.

But once again, this does not apply to most site owners.

People tend to believe Google is deploying some overly sophisticated NLP and AI algorithms to establish which pages to push higher and which to penalize.

I rather think it does a great job at collecting, sorting and organizing incredible amounts of very basic data (like keywords occurences and links), finding patterns in it and drawing conclusions.

So I’d focus on those simple things.

But that’s my personal opinion based on what I know about the current state of NLP and AI technologies – they’re way more primitive than people think they are.

The results from this study have only solidified this opinion.

Here’s the link to our research methods in case you want more details, or would like to replicate this study.