Has the keyword planner search volume metric gone crazy?
-
I use the search volume found in keyword planner to score and weight my keywords in a similar way as Rand showed us in this WBF.
This week I've found that in many cases suddenly the singular and plural version of the keyword have the same search volume. This seems crazy to me as singular and plural is not the same, the intent is different but more importantly they behave very differently from each other when looking at their track record in Adwords (impressions, clicks, conversions, CTR, CVR etc...all different).
For example, here's a screenshot of 4 keywords (singular and plural versions of 2 phrases) with search volume captured a couple of months ago.
Now here's another screenshot of the same keywords taken from Keyword planner today.
Any ideas why this would be happening? Does it makes sense to you? It just seems buggy to me.
Thanks!
-
Well, it's annoying.
We actually got some feedback from our Adwords support saying "the Engineering team is looking to improve/change this behavior as feedback indicates it is confusing for customers. But for the moment, no details yet on what/how it will change."
So let's see, I suppose the more complaints they get from the PPC community the more likely they are to roll things back.
-
Another thing on the subject I noticed is:
For some phrases it will report the aggregate search volume, thus equal s.v. for the singular and plural. e.g. tel aviv hostels and tel aviv hostel show each a s.v. of 1300.
But "Jerusalem hostel" (s.v. reported - 880) and "Jerusalem hostels" (170) don't!!!
So W.T.F. Google trying to do here? Make us realize that they really really don't want us to use k.w.p. data? First take away the broad s.v. data leaving only the lesser valuable data of the exact, then having the bucket aggregation .... What's next? Don't they want us to show the true potential in Google searches to digital marketing clients??? Kind of hard when you have to either give false inflated numbers and say that there is no true accurate number these are all estimates that might even be very far from the real numbers.
-
Hi,
It is the same with Hebrew search phrases same s.v. for singular and plural.
The odd thing is that the search results for each are different. So I don't understand the logic here on Googles side, if you look at them as the same meaning, why are the search results different? they should aslo be exactly the same!
-
Couldn't agree more!
-
Thanks E_F. I've not heard anything back from Adwords support in Europe yet.
Wouldn't it be great if Google would also explain why they changed the methodology as the tool is no longer fit for the purpose it was originally designed for?:-)
-
Finally got a reply from the Adwords support team:
“there was a recent change in how average monthly searches are calculated in Keyword Planner and it is now expected that search terms that are close variants to each other will show the same aggregated search volumes” -
Yes I saw those articles and they're reporting similar findings as this post. Although nothing official yet from Google so I'm still keeping my fingers crossed for this to be a bug...Will be on the lookout for an official update note...
-
Breaking news on SEW is that Google made a change to the tool last week to combine search variants.Articles belowInstead of showing individual keyword estimates per KW or KW phrase, it now lumps in the data together which means that it will show identical estimates for both both. It's no longer possible to see individual estimates to check highest/lowest volumes anymore. All the data has been changed retrospectively alsohttp://www.thesempost.com/googles-keyword-planner-now-combines-keywords-for-search-volume/https://searchenginewatch.com/2016/06/29/googles-keyword-planner-tool-just-became-even-more-inaccurate/Adwords Keyword Planner now seems to combine many search variants, including:
- plurals with non-plurals for any word in the keyword phrase
- acronyms with longhand version e.g. SEO + search engine optimiZation + search engine optimiSation
- stemming variants: -er, -ing, -ized, -ed etc keywords (ie. designer, designing, designed)
- words that can be spelled with or without space (ie. car park and carpark)
- words with and without punctuation (ie. kid toys and kid’s toys)
-
If I had to guess, it seems to be an issue with "close keyword variations" which Google use for matching keywords to search terms in Adwords and the planner tool now somehow sums up the total search volume for all these variations. Which makes it looks like search volume has doubled or tripled or more depending on how many variations you're looking at.
Our PPC team is pushing for answers from our GG account manager but so far they say they are not aware of any changes to the tool and "believe the information to be accurate".
Will update here if we learn anything new.
-
Hi there
I'm seeing crazy inflated keyword volumes from Adwords KW Planner too. I keep a record of the extracts for these 300 KWs so have files going back to Sept-15
Not the same issue as with plural/singular highlighted by the other but...
-
an inflated "Avg. Monthly Searches (exact match only)" number in June versus all other previous months by 6x in some cases e.g. avg monthly searches for a particular KW was 2,400 up to April and now it's gone to 14,800.
-
And also, Google have also retrospectively updated each of the 12 previous months average search query volumes by keyword.
Here's an example attached. Hope you can read it
Out of the ~300 KWs I track, 40 keywords have 2x'd and higher their average monthly keyword volume. 81 KWs have increased average monthly search volumes by 50%
To me it looks like either it's either a bug (or new method) in how Google count average monthly searches or they haven't updated their KW volumes in this tool in the last 12 months.
-
-
Definitely some odd ones - I think Google may be conflating certain keywords, and removal of the ability to see exact match vs. phrase/broad match is definitley an issue, too. In any case, we're sorta stuck with their data. Moz is collecting some additional search volume information via clickstream sources and including that in our buckets for KW Explorer, but that only applies to the US (and won't give precise numbers since we can only get sampled data).
-
correction..."masters in accounting" vs "masters of accounting". It's Monday and the Warriors lost.
-
We're seeing this as well. It doesn't seem as simple as plural vs singular.
"MBA" & "Master of Business Administration" now have the same search volume. "MBA" had 110,000 before and "Master of Business Administration" had 2,400. These variations also have 110K searches/mo now: "Masters Business Administration", "Masters of Business Administration", "Master in Business Administration". Seems like they are bucketing those as the same keyword but then "masters in accounting" is different than "masters in accounting".
-
Yes you're right, the example I provided is not as crazy as what I've seen in our other markets (countries) and I'm fine with Google using buckets as long as I can understand the relative search demand of a keyword compared to another. I don't think we should take the search volumes given by Google as gospel but it's been helpful in the past as a comparison tool.
So what about this - here is a list of plural and singular versions of keywords in Sweden, Denmark, Germany and Switzerland. Something has definitely changed and in many cases relatively small keywords suddenly look huge.
If you run the keyword variations in Google Trends you'll see that they don't have the same search demand. I also had a look in Adwords for the plural and singular version of one of our biggest keywords, this is what their impressions look like over time and now they have the same search volume in keyword planner.
I haven't seen this in all countries but it seems to be happening in the US as well (if you have old search volume data lying around, have a look and see if you get the same increase for the less popular version).
If Google has decided that plurals and singulars are the same and that search marketers should treat them as such, I can learn to live with that as long as I see consistency in this approach (which I don't, France for example still shows different search demand for singulars and plurals). Google should also show the same SERP results for these keywords, which they don't and I believe this is because the intent is (slightly) different between plural and singular search.
I think this is a bug, perhaps I have overlooked this but I can't recall seeing the option "Only show ideas closely related to my search terms" before in keyword planner and if this is a new feature it might be what's breaking the tool. Just guessing here of course but the reality is that turning this setting on/off changes absolutely nothing for me.
So what do you think? Is this an issue for anyone else?
Thanks for your insights and suggestions.
-
The numbers you received in your second screenshot are the same ones I'm getting, and they're pretty similar to what I see in Moz's Keyword Explorer (which bolsters AdWords data with clickstream serach data). I don't know that AdWords is going crazy though - the first screenshot you showed had keywords in the 4-600 range that now show ~1,000 searches? That's not a massive swing, and we know Google uses buckets, even though they show numbers (as Russ Jones pointed out here: https://moz.com/blog/google-keyword-planner-dirty-secrets).
It wouldn't surprise me if these keywords are just on the edge of the buckets Google's defined, and thus swing between one volume number and another.
-
Are you referring to the setting in the keyword planner called "keyword option" and the choice "Only show ideas closely related to my search terms"? Is this a new option in the tool?
Anyway, I get the same result regardless if this is on or off.
It definitely would make sense if there was a setting where I could choose to look at exact match only but I can't seem to locate it. (EDIT: and Google has not changed the definition of search volume in the tool: "The average number of times people have searched for this exact keyword based on the date range and targeting settings that you've selected.")
-
I think the biggest difference is in the match type of the keywords. In the end they're used broad in this case which would make sense that the singular and plural could be the same. Usually when you would have an exact match you're going to see a difference in volume.
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
Does it make sense to pursue long-tail keywords with low search volume
Hi Moz community, I need your insight into what would ensure better rankings. Some of the pages that I am optimizing are dedicated to niche products targeting specific verticals and the main keywords have really low average search volume (below 50). I'll give you an example (these are not the exact keywords, just an example to illustrate my dilemma): if my long-tail keyword is "student information management software" with search volume of 20, when do I stand better chances to gain search visibility: by optimizing the page for this long-tail keyword and incorporating it in the title tag, or by pursuing more generic keywords with higher search volume: "student" and "information management software"? If I am targeting short-tail keywords, will the page also rank for long-tail searches that are a combination of these keywords? In other words, which scenario gives better chances to rank higher: 1) pursuing short-tail keywords with high search volume in the title-tag 2) pursuing fewer long-tail keywords with lower search volume that are a combination of those in scenario 1? Thanks in advance for your help!
Keyword Research | | Scratch_MM0 -
Number of keywords for single page website
Hello, i have a question about keywords in Single page website. For how many keywords should i focus in single page website? For example: In my industry are important 2 different keywords - cabinet making and **made to measure furniture. **Should i focus on both keywords or its better to pick better keyword and focus only for that one (of course including different forms of that word and so on). Thank you for help.
Keyword Research | | Reyzer1 -
Most efficiënt way to retrieve search volume for thousands of keyword
Hi, I'm trying to figure out how I can efficiently get search volumes for large quantities of keywords. Unfortunately Keyword Planner has reduced their limit of keywords:
Keyword Research | | CB0001
"You entered too many keywords. Please limit the number of keywords to 1,000. You can also upload a file with up to 800 keywords." Weirdly, the file upload's limit is now even lower than the normal limit. A 1000 keywords a time will be a real chore when you want to retrieve search volume for 50.000 keywords. I tried SEMrush, but it does not suffice due to the fact that a lot of keywords in my language (Dutch) are not in the database. I also looked into the Adwords API, but this does not yet seem to have any implementation in Google sheets? Ideas are welcome!1 -
Why does this keyword have much greater volume in Bing Keyword Research Tool than Google AdWords Keyword Planner?
I'm using the Google AdWords keyword planner and Bing Webmaster Keyword Research tool. For both, I'm trying to get accurate search volume for the exact term "advertising sales". Over the last thirty days, Bing reports a volume of 5,988. Google's average monthly search volume is 880. Given the market share Google has, I would expect a much higher volume, especially when compared to Bing. Can you offer some ideas of why this might be happening?
Keyword Research | | Kevin_P0 -
Google algo mistake in persian search?
I recently wanted to work on a high important persian keyword (شارژ ایرانسل) and analysis it on moz.com Difficulty SERP. But the result was very Surprised me. because the second top site in SERP used more than 15 time the keyword in home page and Google doesn't mark it as spam. why Google doesn't apply the spam algo in some language? akg2NqH.png kcHgx0D.png gUSez3B.png
Keyword Research | | vahidafshari450 -
Help with understanding how to target keywords not in content ?
I have a customer suggesting the use of keywords related to his competitors but not in the content of his site or how he promotes his brand. The page content is product specific and I use keyword matches for page and site strength. 1.) Does it hurt or help to load up the keywords with misc. keywords (example- the site is for a premium product use the terms "cheap", "affordable") 2.) Any suggestion for almost blank/generic landing pages ? 3.) Any benefit or penalty for using fewer keywords on multiple pages ? (example - target 6-8 words on 30 pages) I need a few discussion points for my next meeting and to clarify my position.
Keyword Research | | sd11sine0 -
How do search engines score "nested" keywords?
I use "nested" for lack of a better term; what I mean is keyword phrases that contain other keyword phrases. For example, if I have a page that is extremely well optimized (on-page) for the phrase "old silver coins", is that page by default also extremely well optimized (on-page) for the phrase "silver coins"? Or does google understand that I am optimizing for the longer phrase "old silver coins" and somehow exclude me from contention for the sub-phrase "silver coins"? I understand that this gets more complicated when talking about backlinks (off-page), but the same general question remains. If I am getting good backlinks for "old silver coins", am I also getting good backlinks for "silver coins" at the same time? I do understand that "silver coins" may be more competitive than "old silver coins" and so my page may not rank the same for the two phrases. But I am really curious if there is some kind of multiplier effect with nested keyword phrases like the example I have provided, or whether google somehow only credits for the full phrase and not for any sub-phrases contained therein. Any insight would be greatly appreciated! (And sorry if this has been addressed already. I have looked around the site and have googled this question, but haven't found anything useful yet.) Thanks. BONUS QUESTION: Are the answers to my questions above exactly the same when discussing singular versus plural keywords ("coins" versus "coin")? After all, that is a "nested case just like my examples above. On the other hand, I can see there being some special treatment of singular and plural.
Keyword Research | | Kp2221 -
Keyword Targeting
If I am currently ranking well for "Lawn Mowers" and I also want to target "Cheap Lawn Mowers" will it affect my ranking for "Lawn Mowers" if I change my on page optimization by adding "Cheap" to the title, H1, etc. or will it effectively target both.
Keyword Research | | UK2Group0