Seaches & Clicks Research
-
Is there a way to check the percentage of clicks on specific websites based on searches that people do? For example, say I searched "sneakers", what percentage of viewers clicked on a particular site.
-
Thanks!
-
There is a company is the UK that offer a tool that does this. Not sure if this is the right link but the tool is part of Experian.
http://www.experian.co.uk/integrated-marketing/web-analytics.html
They call me a month or so ago to demo it. It had amazing data but was extremely expensive (circa £10-50k per year if I remember correctly).
-
I do not know of such a tool - maybe try SEMRush? They have a lot by way of competitive analysis.
-
I mean for all sites. ie: competitors
-
You mean for your own site? yo can see this in both bing and goole wmt
-
Thank you - this is general info. I was wondering if there's an actual tool to see the click-through rate for certain keywords.
-
You could use the percentages from any of the click through rate reports out there for a rough guess;
Coconut Headphones (there's a 2nd part to this article too)
Bear in mind, everyone's reports are always a bit different. There are so many variables to estimating click through rate, its nearly impossible to come up with exact percentages across the board, as they can vary by industry, amount of PPC ads, local search vs general search, if there's videos or images in the result etc.
But hope those links help!
-Dan
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
-
Googles Search Intent – Plural & Singular KW’s
This is more of a ‘gripe’ than a question, but I would love to hear people’s views. Typically, when you search for a product using the singular and plural versions of the keyword Google delivers different SERPs. As an example, ‘leather handbag’ and ‘leather handbags’ return different results, but surely the search intent is exactly the same? You’d have thought Google was now clever enough to work this out. We tend to optimise our webpages for both the plural and singular variations of the KW’s, but see a mixed bag of results when analysing rankings. Is Google trying to force us to create a unique webpage for the singular version, and another unique webpage for the plural version? This would confuse the visitor, and make no sense.. the search intent is the same! How do you combat this problem? Many thanks in advance. Lee.
Algorithm Updates | | Webpresence0 -
Best way to handle outdated & years old Blog-posts?
Hi all, We have almost 1000 pages or posts from our blog which are indexed in Google. Few of them are years old, but they have some relevant and credible content which appears in search results. I am just worried about other hundreds of non-relevant posts which are years old. Being hosting hundreds of them, our website is holding lots of these useless indexing pages which might be giving us little negative impact of keeping non-ranking pages. What's the best way to handle them? Are these pages Okay? Or must be non-indexed or deleted? Thanks
Algorithm Updates | | vtmoz0 -
Why is the AMP tool saying I have invalid structured data when the structured data tool shows no errors?
Why is the AMP tool saying there's missing or invalid structured data on http://www.tasteofhome.com/recipes/flavorful-chicken-fajitas/amp when the structured data tool shows no errors? In addition, I'm not able to see a preview of the rich card in the AMP tool like I can for other recipes like https://allrecipes.com/recipe/19621/eggs-on-the-grill/amp/. If you check https://allrecipes.com/recipe/19621/eggs-on-the-grill/amp in the AMP tool, we get this message: "Page has valid structured data. This page is eligible for extended AMP features." Google has instructions on how to get rich cards for recipes (https://developers.google.com/search/docs/data-types/recipes), but i'm not sure if we're violating anything other than image aspect ratio. Thanks!
Algorithm Updates | | dianedragan0 -
Is it bad from an SEO perspective that cached AMP pages are hosted on domains other than the original publisher's?
Hello Moz, I am thinking about starting to utilize AMP for some of my website. I've been researching this AMP situation for the better part of a year and I am still unclear on a few things. What I am primarily concerned with in terms of AMP and SEO is whether or not the original publisher gets credit for the traffic to a cached AMP page that is hosted elsewhere. I can see the possible issues with this from an SEO perspective and I am pretty sure I have read about how SEOs are unhappy about this particular aspect of AMP in other places. On the AMP project FAQ page you can find this, but there is very little explanation: "Do publishers receive credit for the traffic from a measurement perspective?
Algorithm Updates | | Brian_Dowd
Yes, an AMP file is the same as the rest of your site – this space is the publisher’s canvas." So, let's say you have an AMP page on your website example.com:
example.com/amp_document.html And a cached copy is served with a URL format similar to this: https://google.com/amp/example.com/amp_document.html Then how does the original publisher get the credit for the traffic? Is it because there is a canonical tag from the AMP version to the original HTML version? Also, while I am at it, how does an AMP page actually get into Google's AMP Cache (or any other cache)? Does Google crawl the original HTML page, find the AMP version and then just decide to cache it from there? Are there any other issues with this that I should be aware of? Thanks0 -
Google not crawling click to expand content - suggestions?
It seems like Google confirmed this week in a G+ hangout that content in click to expand content e.g. 'read more' dropdown and tabbed content scenarios will be discounted. The suggestion was if you have content it needs to be visible on page load. Here's more on it https://www.seroundtable.com/google-index-click-to-expand-19449.html and the actual hangout, circa 11 mins in https://plus.google.com/events/cjcubhctfdmckph433d00cro9as. From a UX and usability point of view having a lot of content that was otherwise tabbed or in click to expand divs can be terrible, especially on mobile. Does anyone have workable solutions or can think of examples of really great landing pages (i'm mostly thinking ecommerce) that also has a lot of visible content? Thanks Andy
Algorithm Updates | | AndyMacLean0 -
Question regarding research tools
The keyword analysis tool on seomoz is currently down. Are there are any other trustworthy tools I can use?
Algorithm Updates | | uofmiamiguy0 -
How can we start to improve Domain MozRank & MozTrust for our website?
A simple question maybe, but how and where do we start if we want to improve our 'Domain MozRank & Moztrust', 'assuming of course that by improving both these we will improve our rankings with Google plus sales?
Algorithm Updates | | ewanTHH0 -
Anyone else noticing that Bing & Yahoo are delivering widely different results
Anyone else noticing that Bing & Yahoo are delivering widely different results in past week. Prior to that after they started using Bing SE it seemed like they were identical, but no more. I am using RankTracker and getting this on several web sites.
Algorithm Updates | | BrandTastic0