It’s been quite a while since I first read (and bookmarked) Slingshot SEO’s YouMoz blog post, Mission ImposSERPble: Establishing Click-through Rates, which showcased their study examining organic click-through rates (CTR) across search engine result pages. The Slingshot study is an excellent example of how one can use data to uncover trends and insights. However, that study is over two and a half years old now, and the Google search results have evolved significantly since then.
Using the Slingshot CTR study (and a few others) as inspiration, Catalyst thought it would be beneficial to take a fresh look at some of our own click-through rate data and dive into the mindset of searchers and their proclivity for clicking on the different types of modern organic Google search results.
Swing on over to Catalyst’s website and download the free Google CTR Study: How User Intent Impacts Google Click-Through Rates
**TANGENT: I'm really hoping that the Moz community's reception of this 'sequel' post follows the path of some of the all-time great movie sequels (think Terminator 2, The Godfather: Part II) and not that of Jaws 2.
How is the 2013 Catalyst CTR study unique?
- RECENT DATA: This CTR study is the most current large-scale US study available. It contains data ranging from Oct. 2012 – June 2013. Google is constantly tweaking its SERP UI, which can influence organic CTR behavior.
- MORE DATA: This study contains more keyword data, too. The keyword set for this study spans 17,500 unique queries across 59 different websites. More data can lead to more accurate representations of the true population.
- MORE SEGMENTS: This study segments queries into categories not covered in previous studies which allows us to compared CTR behavior attributed to different keyword types. For example, branded v. unbranded queries, and question v. non-question based queries.
How have organic CTRs changed over time?
The most significant changes since the 2011 Slingshot study is the higher CTRs for positions 3, 4, and 5.
Ranking on the first page of search results is great for achieving visibility; however, the search result for your website must be compelling enough to make searchers want to click through to your website. In fact, this study shows that having the most compelling listing in the SERPs could be more important than “ranking #1” (provided you are still ranking within the top five listings, anyway).
Read on to learn more.
Since Slingshot’s 2011 study, click-through rates have not dramatically shifted, with the total average CTR for first page organic results dropping by just 4%.
While seemingly minor, these downward shifts could be a result of Google’s ever-evolving user interface. For example, with elements such as Product Listing Ads, Knowledge Graph information, G+ authorship snippets, and other microdata becoming more and more common in a Google SERP, users’ eyes may tend to stray further from the historical “F shape” pattern, impacting the CTR by ranking position.
Positions 3-5 showed slightly higher average CTRs than what Slingshot presented in 2011. A possible explanation for this shift is that users could be more aware of Paid Search listing located at the top of the results page, so in an attempt to “bypass” these results, they may have modified their browsing behavior to quickly scan/wheel-scroll past a few listings down the page.
What is the distribution of clicks across a Google SERP?
Business owners need to understand that even if your website ranks in the first organic position for your target keyword, your site will almost certainly never receive traffic from every one of those users/searchers.
On average, the top organic SERP listing (#1) drives visits from around 17% of Google searches.
The top four positions, or typical rankings “above the fold” for many desktop users, receive 83% of first page organic clicks.
The Catalyst data also reveals that only 48% of Google searches result in a page one organic click (meaning any click on listings ranging 1-10). So what is the other 52% doing? Two things, the user either clicks on a Paid Search listing, or they “abandon” the search, which we define as:
- Query Refinement – based on the displayed results, the user alters their search
- Instant Satisfaction – based on the displayed results, the user gets the answer they were interested in without having to click
- 2nd Page Organic SERP – the user navigates to other SERPs
- Leave Search Engine – the user exits the Google search engine
How do branded query CTRs differ from unbranded queries?
Branded CTRs for top ranking terms are lower than unbranded CTRs, likely due to both user intent and the way Google presents results.
These numbers shocked us a bit. At the surface, you might assume that listings with top rankings for branded queries would have higher CTRs than unbranded queries. But, when you take a closer look at the current Google UI and place yourself in the mindset of a searcher, our data actually seems more likely.
Consumers who search unbranded queries are often times higher in the purchasing funnel: looking for information, without a specific answer or action in mind. As a result, they may be more likely to click on the first result, particularly when the listing belongs to a strong brand that they trust.
Additionally, take a look at the example below, notice how many organic results are presented “above the fold” for a unbranded query compared to an branded query (note: these SERP screenshots were taken from 1366x768 screen resolution). There are far fewer potential organic click paths for a user to take when presented with the branded query's result page (1 organic result v. 4.5 results). It really boils down to 'transactional' v. 'informational' queries. Typically, keywords that are more transactional (e.g. purchase intent) and/or drive higher ROI are more competitive in the PPC space and as a result will have more paid search ads encroaching on valuable SERP real estate.
We all know the makeup of every search result page is different and the number of organic results above the fold can be influenced by a number of factors, including, device type, screen size/resolution, paid search competiveness, and so on.
You can use your website analytics platform to see what screen resolutions your visitors are using and predict how many organic listings your target audience would typically see for different search types and devices. In our example, you can see that my desktop visitors most commonly use screen resolutions higher than 1280x800, so I can be fairly certain that my current audience typically sees up to 5 organic results from a desktop Google search.
Does query length/word count impact organic CTR?
As a user’s query length approaches the long tail, the average CTR for page one rankings increases.
The organic click percentage totals represented in this graph suggest that as a user’s query becomes more refined they are more likely to click on a first page organic result (~56% for four+ word queries v. ~30% for one-word queries).
Furthermore, as a query approaches the long tail, click distributions across the top ten results begin to spread more evenly down the fold. Meaning, when a consumer’s search becomes more refined/specific, they likely spend more time scanning the SERPs looking for the best possible listing to answer their search inquiry. This is where compelling calls-to-action and eye-catching page titles/meta descriptions can really make or break your organic click through rates.
As previously stated, only about 30% of one-word queries result in a first page organic click. Why so low? Well, one potential reason for this is that searchers use one-word queries simply to refine their search based on their initial impression of the SERP. This means that the single word query would become a multiple word query. If the user does not find what they are looking for within the first result, they modify their search to be more specific, often resulting in the query to contain multiple words.
Additionally, one-word queries resulted in 60% of the total first page organic clicks (17.68%) being attributed to the first ranking. Maybe, by nature, one-word queries are very similar to navigational queries (as the keywords are oftentimes very broad or a specific brand name).
Potential business uses
Leveraging click-through rate data enables us to further understand user behavior on a search result and how it can differ depending on search intent. These learnings can play an integral role in defining a company’s digital strategy, as well as forecasting website traffic and even ROI. For instance:
- Forecasting Website Performance and Traffic Given a keyword’s monthly search volume, we can predict the number of visits a website could expect to receive by each ranking position. This becomes increasingly valuable when we have conversion rate data attributed to specific keywords.
- Identifying Search Keyword Targets With Google Webmaster Tools’ CTR/search query data we can easily determine the keywords that are “low-hanging fruit”. We consider low hanging fruit to be keywords that a brand ranks fairly well on, but are just outside of achieving high visibility/high organic traffic because the site currently ranks “below the fold” on page 1 of the SERPs or rank somewhere within pages 2-3 of the results.). Once targeted and integrated into the brand’s keyphrase strategy, SEOs can then work to improve the site’s rankings for that particular query.
- Identifying Under-performing Top Visible Keywords
By comparing a brand’s specific search query CTR against the industry average as identified in this report, we can identify under-performing keyphrases. Next, an SEO can perform an audit to determine if the low CTR is due to factors within the brand’s control, or if it is caused by external factors.
Data set, criteria, and methodology
Some information about our data set and methodology. If you’re like me, and want to follow along using your own data, you can review our complete process in our whitepaper. All websites included in the study are Consumer Packaged Goods (CPG) brands. As such, the associated CTRs, and hypothesized user behaviors reflect only those brands and users.
Data was collected via each brand’s respective Google Webmaster Tools account, which was then processed and analyzed using a powerful BI and data visualization tool.
Catalyst analyzed close to 17,500 unique search queries (with an average ranking between 1–10, and a minimum of 50 search impressions per month) across 59 unique brands over a 9 month timeframe (Oct. 2012 – Jun 2013).
Here are a few definitions so we’re all on the same page (we mirrored definitions as provided by Google for their Google Webmaster Tools)…
- Click-Through Rate (CTR) - the percentage of impressions that resulted in a click for a website.
- Average Position – the average top position of a website on the search results page for that query. To calculate average position, Google takes into account the top ranking URL from the website for a particular query.
Final word
I have learned a great deal from the studies and blog posts shared by Moz and other industry experts throughout my career, and I felt I had an opportunity to meaningfully contribute back to the SEO community by providing an updated, more in-depth Google CTR study for SEOs to use as a resource when benchmarking and measuring their campaigns and progress.
For more data and analysis relating to coupon-based queries, question based queries, desktop v. mobile user devices, and more download our complete CTR study.
Have any questions or comments on our study? Did anyone actually enjoy Jaws 2? Please let us know and join the discussion below!
I am delighted to see the SEO community starting to focus more on intent vs. individual keywords. I believe that this shift in methodology will draw a clear line between strategic and tactical SEO practices.
Not to be needy, but I would love to see this being linked to personas – How do middle aged females behave on the SERPs vs. Millennial… and so on.
Great work Andrew!!!
Persona data should become easier for us to discover through this post: https://plus.google.com/u/0/+GoogleAnalytics/posts/EC3tNLcCXof
I agree with Ben here. The SEO community as a whole seems stuck in the thought process of what SEO used to be. They've lost sight on the fact that we are marketers as well, and need to operate as such. We need to focus on user intent if we expect to win.
Ben - I was hoping the Moz community would ask for additional data segmentation (e.g. demographics/psychographics)! Another area I personally want to dig deeper into is the impact 'authoritative' sites have on organic CTRs. By 'authoritative' I mean the big guys - the major eCommerce sites (e.g. Amazon) and informational sites (e.g. Wikipedia).
Rest assured, the Catalyst team is collecting tons of data and working on this type of analysis as we speak. Once we pull it all together you will be one of the first I contact to share our findings.
I would love for you to provide additional data segmentation, I just feel bad knowing how much time visual assets take to create but seems like you're looking for an invitation and if you already have the data please share it will defiantly be of great value.Understanding various location data always helps and the psychology behind it has never been so important. Thanks Andrew
Hey great sequel Andrew this post belongs somewhere between Terminator and Godfather for sure. Lol! Ben I agree that it was about time that Seo's evolve to focusing on Intent while dropping the whole keyword methodology, yet this will stiffen the Competition and quite frankly it's been quite an advantage in the last year over Marketers that remain stuck in the past. Ben I believe that Andrew will come back with a part 3 touching personas and how to raise CTR's through target audiences.
Great post Andrew, I'm a big fan of CTR data and the important role it plays in the ever-evolving search industry. Checking device resolution and device type to offer greater insights on where your domain needs to rank to be visibly above the fold is a great idea considering the continuous testing and new Google roll outs from PLA's, to carousels, to various knowledge graph objects. To me it seems like 'transactional' & 'informational' queries blend together when a consumer is looking to purchase a service as opposed to a physical product, for example "Golf lessons". Searching "Golf Lessons" returns the Google carousel with local places that offer lessons, review websites of those places, and a handful of domains that are actually tied to a company that offers golf lessons. So clearly companies need local offices/offerings and google+ pages to play but should they do more? Do you think moving forward that companies should pursue those few non-review organic positions, or shift budget and work on outreach & improved customer service to increase their user ratings/rank through the review platforms to gain the most visibility?
I always think companies should place a strong emphasis on superior customer service as it can positively impact the business both directly and indirectly. Social platforms like Twitter allow for immediate communication between brands and consumers. Even the smallest interaction can go a long way.
A few examples of great Twitter customer service that come to mind: @JetBlue ; @zappos
What I find particularly interesting is that the data didn't deviate as significantly as I would have expected from the Slingshot SEO data. I would have expected that the addition of rich snippets and authorship images would have more of an impact, but it seems that position in the SERP is still a suppreme determinant of CTR. Great stuff!
That was my initial feeling as well. I thought for sure that we would see a pretty strong different from the Slingshot research years ago. I guess it's good though, just add more credibility to both company's data.
Excellent data insights. It is really interesting to see "unbranded" search queries have slightly better CTR than "branded" ones. The data also summarizes and confirms to our SEO practices: targeting long-tailed unbranded keyphrases as these would eventually be top CTR performers.
Good stuff, Andrew. Definitely on Judgement Day level.
What would you say the biggest killer of CTR is that a webmaster could have control over?
Thanks Clayburn. The first element that comes to mind that can significantly impact your organic CTR is certainly your ranking on the first SERP. Our data clearly shows that being visible above the fold should yield higher traffic to your site. While webmasters don't have direct control over their organic rankings, they certainly can influence it through proper SEO (plenty of great info on Moz referencing that).
Now, assuming equal rankings for a given query, I would have to go back to the classics - title tags and meta descriptions. Generally speaking, I would focus on the following elements when crafting these elements - word choice, query match, call-to-action, and character length. I thought this slidedeck by Upworthy was great at delivering how important a title can to your content success. They write 25 different titles for each piece of content they publish.
-Andrew
Andrew, as you know, I love this research you've done! I think you're right about well-crafted title tags and descriptions playing a crucial role in improving CTR.
I'd like to add to your point and note that implementing Schema.org tags to your important pages (or even just using the GWT Data Highlighter) can help improve the quality of your search results listings and make them more compelling as well. As you stated, rich snippets could certainly account for some of the higher CTRs for positions 3, 4, and 5, as shoppers notice things like star ratings and pricing info directly in the SERPs.
So, not exactly as important as an optimized title & description, but a close second in my book if you're trying to make your search results more compelling, especially if your competitors don't have them yet!
It would be interesting to filter out the effects of local results as an effect on lower branded CTR. People seeing the address and phone number they are looking for and then taking that interaction off-line.
Really glad you included the organic (48%) vs. paid click through rate breakdown.
I keep on coming across the old 75% organic 25% paid breakdown from years ago, and although I knew that organic CTRs weren't nearly as high as 75% I didn't have an updated number. Now I do. Woohoo!
Nice job with the research in general as well. I feel like CTRs are an overlooked element of SEO these days. So many folks focus on getting a first page ranking, then they stop thinking the job is done.
Keep the data coming!
Thanks for the kind words Dan. Much appreciated.
Whether working with a client or on my own personal website I always look to compare data against industry benchmarks. Having the most accurate and most up to date data as possible can only lead to better forecasting, better strategy, and better results.
Hi Luke, excellent question. In looking at our data set I found the following which applies to desktop users....
7% of Google searches result in a page two organic click
The CTR curve peaks at position 13. It is interesting that the top rank (position 11) shows one of the lower CTRs for the 2nd SERP. Also, rankings in the 'middle' of the page (pos. 14-16) have very similar click through rates.
CTR by position -
11 - 0.52
12 - 1.03
13 - 1.51
14 - 0.83
15 - 0.82
16 - 0.77
17 - 0.60
18 - 0.42
19 - 0.31
20 - 0.18
FYI -this analysis is not published in the Catalyst white paper, but I may write a full post on it over at the Catalyst blog. I will notify you here once it is live.
Interesting trend. Thanks for posting this.
I found these 2 Google+ Ripples (interactive visual showcasing the discussions and shares across Google+) pretty interesting and wanted to share with the group. With this information you can easily see
https://plus.google.com/ripple/details?url=https://moz.com/ugc/mission-imposserpble-2-user-intent-click-through-rates
https://plus.google.com/u/0/ripples/details?activityid=z131itaq0lrsftjgk04cj15rylemcxip1qk0k
Cyrus Shepard,Rand Fishkin,and Mark Traphagen are the biggest influencers thus far!
A HUGE thanks to everyone who has shared the post!
This is very informative info, Andrew! It's interesting to see that searchers aren't just focusing on the top position in organic results anymore. I also found it interesting when you talk about the instant satisfaction factor. I've noticed this a lot just recently that more and more I'm finding the answer I need, specifically when asking a search engine a question, without even having to click thru to the website. Appreciate you pulling this together for us!
Thanks Michelle. I agree, as the Google Knowledge Graph continues to expands into more areas, the number of queries that will be 'satisfied/answered' without even having to click away from the results page will likely increase.
A colleague of mine, Dan Cristo, recently discussed exactly that (Google Knowledge Graph), among a few other related topics, in this webinar. In it, Dan does a great job of breaking down recent Google Patents relating to query relevancy and how they are improving their ability to derive meaning from a query.
Thank you for this document Andrew. Do you think that in the next five years, organic CTR will continue to drop or do you believe that it will fragment into other devices like Tablet, Mobile, and possibly Glass?
As device usage continues to shift away from desktops I think you could expect CTRs and general SERP user behavior to be impacted as well.
Well, that took a while to read through, but it was worth it!
I definitely like how you showed the difference between a branded search and unbranded search. Your study clearly showed how trying to rank for a "transactional search" was ultra competitive. I guess that's why if you're a smaller brand, it may be better to try ranking for "informational" searches instead?
Is that an effective approach?
Hi James. Thanks for reading!
Yes, I would agree. For smaller brands with minimal media exposure I would first focus on content development targeting informational themes relating to their brand and product set. Achieving organic visibility in this space should be a bit easier than earning a top rank in a 'transactional' SERP. Additionally, the search visibility should help build brand awareness and further establish the brand as an 'authoritative' source on the subject.
All things equal, big 'household name' brands with ample marketing budgets have a sizable advantage when competing for top 'transactional' queries. For one, spending millions on traditional media (e.g. TV, radio, print) will help drive a fairly steady stream of inbound links, helping them rank in better organic spots.
Thanks, Andrew! I thought so. Thanks again for your advice! I appreciate it.
Thanks for sharing your findings. I much preferred "The Empire Strikes Back" to "Star Wars: A New Hope". Talking of Imperial Forces, I’m also interested to see the impact “authoritative” sites like Amazon have on CTR. I’ve also noted a SERP increase in diversified B2C like eBay and Amazon, websites attached to directories and group buying and coupon sites.
Do you think that these “authoritative” sites circumvent or fulfill User Intent?
If they are managing to circumvent it with massive SEO spends or authoritative influence landing them in top positions, is this affecting the results whereby users are filtering the noise and moving beyond the first few SERP positions.
I think as the Google GUI evolves so will user's browsing behavior/patterns. One example that comes to mind is Google's recent testing of the yellow [ad] marker with paid search listings, recently discussed by Dr. Pete. These types of visual changes to the SERP can certainly impact organic CTRs.
Really interesting article. We now have to hope Google won't validates AdWords Image Extensions Beta. If it happen, the entire study will be obsolhete :( https://searchengineland.com/adwords-image-extensions-early-reactions-in-the-wild-examples-162201
48 percent organic clicks to the first page & 52 percent remaining concludes that a major portion of traffic is interested either in non-branded/long tail keywords...does that mean we should focus more on non-branded keywords as compared to branded keywords?
Excellent article and so much data to digest. The charts, graphs and illustrations made it fun to read. I'm a newbie to SERPs and such so I'll be reading this post a couple/few times. Thanks for all the good information!
I can seem to get enough of the vital information provided in this post. Its obvious that the click through rates for any blog or website is a significant analysis.
Using the details of this post brings about better insights to the significant of click through rates (CTR) and how it should be analyzed.
I find this Moz post a very helpful one for marketers who need practical data to make good decisions based on the CTR available!
"In fact, this study shows that having the most compelling listing in the SERPs could be more important than “ranking #1” (provided you are still ranking within the top five listings, anyway)."
The declining value of a number 1 rank has been documented for a while (Think Google's SERP invasion + Ads), but whether or not this is a good thing remains to be seen. SEO purists will suggest that being satisfied with a number 3-4 place is a bit of a cop-out (Clients, anyone?) whereas others (Marketers) will turn it into a Meta/Title War CTR war.
The best have and will continue to do both...
Hello Andrew! I also do believe that business owners should understand that even if their website ranks in
the first organic position for their target keyword, their site will certainly never receive traffic from every one of those users or searchers. Kudos for this superb post of yours!
Hi Andrew
Thanks for such an informative and researched article. I have one quesion in mind that may not be directly related to you article but somehow it is related to CTR only and I hope you can give me a fair idea.
As far as my knowledge SERP rank and organic CTR both are depended on each other. As Organic CTR is aslo one of the SERP ranking factor. Now how do I work on a page (App store landing page) to increase CTR through Mobile.
I have the top spot on several of my most important keywords but the CTRs are only about 5-9% according to Webmaster Tools. I suspect I'm losing clicks to the company ranked right below us that's abusing authorship, I just don't know how to test or measure such a thing.
Once you have the top spot, you have to work on converting as many of those impressions into clicks. Your CTR for the number one rankings could be at those levels for a number of reasons. A few suggestions on how to increase organic CTRs would be to focus on elements within your control - title tag, meta descriptions, URL, rich snippets, etc.
Leverage paid search to test and measure call-to-actions, then update your organic titles/meta descriptions to reflect the top performing CTA. Visually audit the specific search results in question. Is there a high level of paid ads? Google product listing ads? You mentioned your competitor's listing returns authorship, what other visual elements on the SERP would drive a users eye/attention?
This is extremely useful in better understanding how the position in the SERP dramatically effects the CTR. Thank you for sharing this. It would be interesting to see what this looks like for page 2. It seems like there used to be some value in having a result on the second page, but after reading it seems to imply that even making it to the second page is just not enough to build visibility for you business.
Hello Andrew,
I am appreciate for this post, i like your research on CTR. I knew from your post that appropriate title tags and description very important to increase CTR. Thank you so much for giving such a excellent information. Waiting for your next post.
I enjoyed Jaws 2.
Gone are the days when the no. 1 organic position was getting around 30-35% of clicks..SEO, as I see it, got somehow diluted and lost in the overall marketing efforts of a business ; I personally, do not offer (anymore) just SEO services, I offer a complete package that also includes listings in niche portals, banner campaigns on related sites, brans awareness, content marketing (articles on high traffic sites, video, etc). SEO traffic won't do the trick anymore, by itself.