Jul 30, 2022
In Welcome to the Forum
But here’s the thing. Depending on the location of where you’re searching from, you’ll see different pages ranking for this keyword: If you search from Rochester, you’ll see a page from visitrochester.com at #2. If you search from Bakersfield, you’ll see a page from visitbakersfield.com at #1. Top 5 pages in Rochester and Bakersfield, respectively Thus, the owners of these two websites will see a different number of monthly impressions for the keyword “golf courses” in their GSC. That’s because each website ranks well for this keyword only in a specific location. And only the owner of a huge website like golflink.com (which seems to have pages ranking for “golf courses” in every conceivable location) would likely see the number of impressions that is close to the 1 million that GKP shows us. These “regional” keywords quite often have the biggest discrepancy (4x+) between GKP and GSC numbers, which can be seen in our graph above. “Impressions” in GSC are sometimes inflated by bot traffic Let’s talk about those rare cases where GSC shows a higher search volume than GKP. We believe that it likely happens because of the bot traffic. According to John Mueller, not all of the impressions from bots are filtered in GSC: But what is “bot traffic?” Well, that is any kind of script or software program that does automated searches in Google. The “bots” that I’m sure you’re familiar with are rank trackers that make automated searches in Google to report where your website ranks. Dividing the workload like this whatsapp number list allows both the vendor and the affiliate to focus on their strengths. The improvements are similar on desktop and mobile. Most of the focus in 2021 was on mobile results. A much nastier example is bots that generate fake clicks on Google ads to put some pressure on their competitors. Anyhow, according to our study, GSC data seems artificially inflated in only 0.5% of cases. So it’s unlikely that you will suffer much from bots polluting your GSC reports. How does Ahrefs’ search volume data stack up? I’m sure some of you are wondering how Ahrefs’ search volume data compares. Well, let’s plot “Ahrefs/GSC” ratios right next to “GKP/GSC” ratios from the previous graph: Bar chart showing Ahrefs is more accurate than GKP It looks like Ahrefs shows “roughly accurate” values in 60% of cases vs. 45% of cases for GKP. That is mostly due to our ability to “un-group” clusters of similar keywords and report distinct search volumes for each of them. So if you were wondering why the search volumes in Ahrefs are not the same as those in GKP, now you know that is by design.