It's no secret that Google keeps a lot of secrets. From keyword data to link data to traffic data (and surely more), there's a lot that we could benefit from — if they'd only share it! Since that's not likely to happen anytime soon, Rand takes us through various ways to access that all-important data in this week's Whiteboard Friday.
Video Transcription
Hello. My name is Ranigo Montoya. You killed my SEO data. Prepare to die.
Howdy, Moz fans, and welcome to another edition of Whiteboard Friday. This week we are celebrating Halloween six days late. Hopefully, that's all right with all of you. For those of you outside the U.S., Halloween is this holiday where we dress up in costumes. We've done it a few times here on Whiteboard Friday, but it's been a couple of years, so I'm thrilled to be able to bring this back.
I thought in keeping with the theme of Inigo Montoya, one of my favorite characters from "The Princess Bride," we would talk about recovering some of the data that Google either hides or has taken away from us over the years. It's actually kind of cool, because there are a number of tools and processes that we have not had access to three years ago, four years ago, some of them even two years ago, that today enable us to do things that are really remarkable.
Let's start with keyword data.
We need keyword data about traffic, which keywords send traffic to our website, which keywords send traffic to other people's websites, which traffic comes from ads, which traffic comes from organic, where it goes, and what it does. This is critical because we want to see which terms are actually sending the traffic so we can know which ones to concentrate on.
We want to know which ones convert, because if a keyword converts well that probably means we should be focusing more energy on it. We should be trying to rank higher for it. Maybe we should be bidding on it. Perhaps we should be thinking about expanding the universe of terms and phrases around that term that could send us traffic. We should know which ones to target with paid and which ones deserve some organic rank boosting efforts.
How do we do this? Google now sends all traffic with keyword not provided. What's our process here? Well, for a while we've had some estimation tools. Moz has one in Moz Analytics. I think Conductor's got one in their platform. A number of other platforms that rank, track, and then connect to your analytics try and predict which keywords are sending traffic. We can do even better today, and that's thanks to a couple of tools.
One of them is SimilarWeb. SimilarWeb has a panel of users, essentially people who've installed software and toolbars and all sorts of other things that track their browser activity. They've opted in to this. This is not without their knowledge. They know. They've consented. This panel actually includes millions and millions of users. Thus we can get a real sample set of web users, especially in countries like the United States and in Europe where SimilarWeb's panel is relatively large and Israel as well. We can see that data at the clickstream level. Unfortunately, I can't see through this wig.
Because they can see it at the clickstream level, Google is not hiding that. They see this person perform this search. They visited this page, then they visited this page, and then they went over here. That tracking means that if you go into SimilarWeb today, SimilarWeb Pro at least, and you plug in a domain, your domain or other people's domains, you'll actually be able to see a list of the keywords that sent them the most traffic and where that traffic went to.
That is killer. You can export this. You can put it into CSV. You can then compare it up to the pages that get traffic. Really, really cool.
SEMrush is another one. SEMrush monitors tens of millions of keywords. I think it's something in excess of 50 million keywords in the United States and many more millions outside the U.S. as well. They can show who ranks for what today as well as historically, so you can see over time the trend there, and you can see who's advertising. If you say, "Hey I know that this competitor is targeting the same market space as us," I can now go to SEMrush. I can plug them in. I can see all the keywords that they're getting organic traffic from and paid traffic from. Then, I can start to say, "All right. Maybe I should add this to my keyword research list. Maybe I should target these, etc."
Again, you can match it up with that visit data to say we know that this is the URL that ranked and we know the keyword, so since we know the page that ranked, we can see in our own visit data, from landing page reports, which ones got the traffic and which ones didn't. That's pretty darn cool as well. It maybe even gets us to a place of implied click-through rate, which is great.
One thing to be aware of is you have to do a lot of this manually. Today there's no tool that really connects up like the SEMrush and SimilarWeb data along with a landing report. That's a little frustrating. Hopefully, we'll get there soon.
Link data
Link data is one of those things that Google took away many, many years ago. They still provide some link data in Webmaster Tools, now called Search Console, but it is not fantastic. It's not comprehensive. It's a little bit of a pain to get through. It cuts off at certain limits, etc. We want to know why because we want to know who's linking to us and to our competitors. We want to watch for spam. We want to be able to compare our links versus the competition, understand ranking influence from those links potentially, and find new link opportunities. That's especially true for competitive link analysis.
How? Well, we've got the traditional three tools — Majestic, Ahrefs and Moz. There have been a bunch of analyses recently. The way that I think of them is Majestic has the largest index by a long shot. I think they're two or three times larger than Ahrefs. Ahrefs is anywhere between about 100% this size, so same size as Moz, and 200% depending on how Moz's indices are doing, which hopefully they'll be doing a little better soon. Moz is the smallest of these three, which I'm embarrassed to say.
What Moz is really good at is metrics. It's actually metrics that mean that Moz is so small, because it's hard to process all those things like page authority and domain authority and spam score, etc.
Ahrefs is terrific for identifying fresh links and high value links. They also have a number of great features inside that tool, that I really like and many SEOs really like, around sorting, filtering, exporting, and visualization.
Majestic has got that huge index. They also have some really great features. They're getting a little more sophisticated with their metrics. I think their metrics are doing nicely compared to Ahrefs.
Each of these are crawling the web and then building indices that are searchable by all of us, which is great. This means that a lot of this data is recovered.
Let's be clear. None of those sources — Majestic, Moz, Ahrefs — none of them are the same size as Google. None of them are crawling exactly what Google is crawling. At least here at Moz, and I assume Majestic and Ahrefs do this as well, we try and model the web as best we can around what's in Google.
When we look at large sets of search results, which we compare to our indices each time, we're between 75% and 80% of what's in Google's results that are in our index. That's good. I think it's not great, but it gives you a sense for how these folks are crawling. It's really about the estimation. Many, many SEOs are combining these sources along with Webmaster Tools in order to find all the links that they possibly can.
Traffic data
You have your own traffic data. But competitive traffic data has always been a pain in the butt. We want that for competitive comparison. We want it to identify missed opportunities like missed channels or links that maybe we were thinking, hey, I'm not sure if I should get a link there, but it looks like that's very valuable. It's sending a lot of traffic, or a relationship with a partner, or an API, or a data source, or even an advertising partnership or relationship.
How can we do that?
Well, there are a few tools. I mentioned SimilarWeb before. They're an excellent choice for this.
There's also a tool out there called Jumpshot. If you use the virus checker Avast (note: I had previously incorrectly cited AVG here), which is relatively popular, Jumpshot is basically owned by them. Anyone with that virus checker has their browser activity monitored and then sent back to Jumpshot. It's all anonymized, and yes it's with consent. You agree to it in the Terms of Use when you download that.
I also think it's fine to use Quantcast, but only when the site has been quantified, meaning they've opted in to Quantcast program and they've put Quantcast pixel tracking on their site. Otherwise, Quantcast in our view — and I did an analysis of this just about six months ago — is very, very inaccurate.
That's true for Quantcast. It's true for Alexa, comScore, and Compete. I would not recommend any of those other ones.
I haven't tried Jumpshot personally. I've seen some folks say that they're good but not as good as SimilarWeb. You can check out both of those and see what you think.
What's really nice about this is being able to look at where my competitors are getting traffic, and how is that increasing or decreasing over time? What are they doing that I'm not doing? What are they doing that I should potentially investigate? It's a lot like competitive link intelligence except on the traffic side. I think for a broadly-focused web marketer, it's critical.
Finally, growth or shrinkage of search visibility
This is frustrating. I really wish Google provided this better, but thankfully there are some very good tools out there. What we want to be able to do is track our competitors' successes in search, watch for potential penalties, and explain why traffic has gone up or down.
Explaining why traffic has gone up or down drives SEOs nuts. I'm sure most of you are sitting there going, "Yeah, that's just the worst." How we can do this is SEMrush with rankings, SimilarWeb with competitive traffic, and our own analytics to show us data. By combining these, we can essentially say, "Hey, I saw my search traffic go up. Is that because I now rank for more stuff?"
If you're rank tracking with Moz Analytics or any of the many ranking solutions out there, you can of course go and look at the tracking that you've got there. If you're not finding the solution in the keywords that you are tracking, you might check out SEMrush, because they might show you data about, hey, here are keywords you haven't been tracking that they've been tracking that are showing why that traffic delta's happening.
Same thing is true for SimilarWeb's traffic. You can go and look at the people who are ranking alongside you and say, "Hey, are they still getting the same amount of search traffic that we are? Because if they've gone down or they've gone up, that suggests that more search volume is to blame, not a rankings change.
Now we can start to sort through these things. We can really figure out who's rising in the rankings, who's falling, and why is their traffic going up or down if it is.
With this, we can recover a ton of the data that we've lost. None of these are super easy. They're not completely plug and play. But many of them are friendly, usable, and really useful for when you have these problems.
All right, everyone, look forward to the comments. We will see you again next week for another edition of Whiteboard Friday. Take care.
Hey Rand,
I couldn't resist commenting on the brief description that you have given to Moz / Majestic / Ahrefs dilemma.
#1 Majestic has a huge Historic index, that is true. Yet I'm not sure if all people realise that "historic" means that most of these links are no longer live. So yeah, for those who are interested in "historic" links - Majestic has the data you need, hands down.
#2 Majestic Fresh index is 182B according to their homepage. To the best of my knowledge "Fresh" means "Live" + all links that they saw "live" in the last 3 months (their homepage says: "Date range: 06 Aug 2015 to 05 Nov 2015").
Well, Ahrefs Live index is 144B - but we focus primarily on re-crawling all these links as fast as we can to make sure they are actually live, which means we keep it small on purpose.
We already started collecting our own historic backlink data in August and introduced "Live / Fresh" switch in our reports. At the moment we don't have a concrete number, but the estimate is that it ads 60% more links to our Live index (approx 230B).
And by the way, how big is Moz index of crawled pages? I could not find any recent data about it.
But for a few URLs I've checked, Ahrefs showed approximately 2x more referring domains than Moz and 4x more backlinks
https://moz.com/google-algorithm-change
https://mashable.com/2011/07/16/google-plus-guide/
#3 About metics. You guys did a study recently and asked for access to Ahrefs API to compare the correlations of our metrics VS yours - which we happily did.
And your own study showed that our data had a better correlation.
Our metrics reach 0.35 correlation with rankings while yours are at 0.27.
Would love to have Majestic included in your study next time :)
That's surprising to me that the correlation of Ahrefs is higher than the MOz. I think it will be great if we can have the Majestic as well.
thanks for the link of findings.
Let's be clear. None of those sources — Majestic, Moz, Ahrefs — none of them are the same size as Google. None of them are crawling exactly what Google is crawling. At least here at Moz, and I assume Majestic and Ahrefs do this as well, we try and model the web as best we can around what's in Google.
Calm down Tim! Ahrefs great product/service too. Just issue there is called size and no one is big enough. So when someone do link analysis he often used all of backlinking sources just to see "almost" complete link profile.
I know - it's expensive.
PS: Rand missed last big competitor in backlinking analysis - WebMeUp.
Totally agree with you, Peter and Rand Fishkin. It is not possible to use only one tool to get a clear picture.
However, most tools require a monthly subscription so we have to balance the cost and benefits.
I am a big fan of STAT Search Analytics, but a warning here: a company has to be able to understand the information in order for it to be valuable. Raw keyword data can include all kinds of numbers and get dense fast.
Thanks for the comment Tim and for digging in. I think the only number you might have got wrong was the correlations from the ranking factors data from May, which showed 0.31 correlation for Moz's linking C-blocks to a page, and 0.35 for Ahrefs (so yes, slightly better correlation for Ahrefs data on some link metrics, but, for example, Moz Page Authority is 0.37, Ahref's dofollow links is 0.3 while Moz's is 0.27, so generally Ahrefs' unprocessed metrics are slightly ahead of Moz's, probably due to size and coverage).
Hey, it's not the size of the index. It's how you use it.
I usually find Moz's linking root domains to be well below what Google Webmaster Tools/Search Console reports, usually at about 20-30%. And it's not just "low quality" links that Moz leaves out or takes a while to discover either—it's occasionally the quality, editorial links that Moz values the most. Majestic is usually around 70-80%. I haven't really used Ahrefs since like 2012 so I can't really say where it stands now.
I still prefer Open Site Explorer over Majestic though because the UI is more intuitive, and the same goes for Moz Analytics overall. It's also super cheap at an agency level. And last, the content and support from Moz are tops in the industry, so I'm already here. Might as well use the tools.
All things considered, the size of Moz's index doesn't really bother me, though of course it would be nice if it were bigger. But if beefing up their index took priority over their other efforts, I'd rather go without.
Yeah - we clearly need to improve on size. We've been wasting a ton of our crawl/indexing bandwidth lately on domains that probably shouldn't be in our index (more on that next week), but we also just need to grow.
Fantastic article Rand, thanks for the info!
Plus, a thousand bonus points for the Princess Bride costume :)
I think that one of the best things about SimilarWeb is that it offers a complete package--and not only a one for SEOs.
We have premium accounts with almost all of the mentioned tools here, but besides Google Analytics, SimilarWeb is the only one my CEO uses on a regular basis.
Keyword data: A very useful feature on SimilarWeb's Search data is the option to “Exclude branded keywords”. And it's even better when you compare with a few competitors.
While I use both SimilarWeb and SEMrush, I'm still a huge fan of two very simple (and even free) tools that we have for keyword data:
1. Search Console>Search Analytics.
2. Google Analytics>Organic Traffic with "Landing page" as a secondary dimension (As you should usually know which keywords drive traffic to a specific page).
And if I'll go back to the Search Analytics report for a sec, then I’ll just say that it has a great feature that many people miss, the “Filter queries” option. I would actually suggest to any SEO out there to filter all keywords but those that contain the brand name and see what people are actually looking for when having the brand in mind. Very powerful in the context of this awesome WBF.
Link data: We use Ahrefs as we learned that it has the best link data for us, but it's important to say that its crawler isn't perfect either. And very often we find "fresh" links that were created months earlier.
And regarding the traffic data, I'll just agree with you Rand that SimilarWeb does the best job here too. BUT – even in 2015, I keep hearing from our media department about clients who still check Alexa before everything else.
Great WBF, as always.
+1 here for Search Analytics...it's a gold mine! All the keyword search traffic data on a per-page basis.
Completely agree about search console. I was surprised (and now very curious) that Rand did not mention it regarding keyword data. I happen to think that it's the most accurate resource available for identifying keywords driving site traffic, albeit not as robust as SEMrush. @Rand - was there a reason why Search Console was not mentioned for keyword data? Do you find it to be flawed in this regard?
The other great resource which wasn't mentioned (maybe because it's not free) is paid search terms from SEM campaigns. So underated.
Hello Rand,
Good to see you. This is indeed Interesting post. Ahref,OSE,Majestic I used all of them for the certain amount of time. All of them have unique importance. It depends on the user that how he/she will collect and analysis the received data from any research tool.
Now I use merely OSE. Its easy to analysis and very important takeaway is quick support from the Moz team.Link Opportunities section is real gem.I think working with at most one tool with Google Analytics/Search Console,will make your productivity smooth and fast.
For eg. For page speed analysis, I use webpagetest.org and solve most of the js, css issues as suggested by it, those are fix issues, at the same time, if I use Google pagespeed insight, chances are high that Google pagespeed insight show the same suggestions. Any Internet bot results' data, also depends on the how the server and your website react while crawling so better double check.
Thank you and have a great weekend :)
Great post Rand!
And interesting comment by Tim (hey, I didn't know you were now at Ahrefs :)).
Regarding Keywords Tools or tools that can allow understand what are our keywords and our competitors ones, I would like to suggest also Sistrix (https://www.sistrix.com). It's a very veteran tool, widely used in Germany and whose use is expanding in other countries.
Sistrix could be defined as a mix between Searchmetrics (which has many characteristics in common with Sistrix) and Semrush.
It monitors literally gazillions keywords in the main European markets and on .com and has a proprietary metrics (Visibility Index), which - by experience - I can tell it's very precise. For instance, in this snapshot, we can see very well depicted how was the migration transition in terms of Search Visibility from SEOmoz.org and Moz.com.
Obviously, you can see for what keywords Sistrix is monitoring your site is visible organically, but Sistrix also show you if your site is visible with more than one URL for every monitored keyword.
If you don't see some keyword in that report (it may happen), you can add them and from that moment Sistrix will add them to their pool of keywords to monitor.
You, then, can do these kind of analysis both for your own website and competitors one.
A second tool I really like is the Domain vs. Domain tool of the Semrush suite. It allows us to confront up to 5 domain names. In this snapshot you can graphically see what is the keyword relations between Moz.com, Searchengineland.com and Searchenginejournal.com.
Quite similar function has the Competitive/Opportunity Keyword Research tool of the SEOZoom SEO Suite, and 100% italian tool that I show you also because soon will be localized also in English. Said that, it's most impressive feature is the Bottlenose lookalike tool Keyword Graph.
Finally, regarding Similarweb... if you are not already present in a market you are going to target or if you weight is so small you cannot really measure your long term competitors, I always start from the Industry Analysis section, where I can analyze what are my competitors in my niche and in my country (or global).
Once analyzed that, I start the analysis of the main competitors one by one and 1 or more vs 1 or more.
Thanks Gianluca for mentioning our newborn tool :) SEOZoom it's an honour for us to be mentioned with other important tools :)
Thanks for the additions Gianluca!
Thanks Gianluca, I agree with u - when you try to analyze a market the best way to do it is with SimilarWeb Industry Analysis, and after it checking the specific competitors and see from where they are getting their traffic
As usual Superb blog Rand, it's pleasure to watch you in WBF...Now, i have few techniques to get my lost data back as you recommended. And yes, because of those tools (SEM, Ahrefs, Moz, Analytics, etc) we can get to know from where the competitors getting traffic and we can follow them..In a one line I can say " There is no SEO without keywords" .. Thanks for the information, keep sharing :)
P.S: Looks beautiful Rand, in the beginning, the four lines make me laugh (you are pure actor) ...Hats of to you man & belated happy halloween :)
Such dedicated professionals. I can't believe that there was only one reference to The Princess Bride in the comments. Love The Princess Bride, love Whiteboard Fridays even more!
'You keep using that word 'SEO', I do not think it means what you think it means...'
Exactly.
I've recently read an article on LinkedIn, It’s Not SEO Anymore, It’s Marketing. Deal With It. by Lee Odden, which highlights the same point: it's no longer SEO, it's turned into marketing.
Best,
VS
SEMRush is the tool that works best for me.
Using this tool correctly, we may be able to attract lots of traffic to our website.
The amount of information that gives us SEMRush is useful.
It works even better than Analytics.
Thanks for the info!
Great WBF as usual Rand, I would recommend using the LSI technique to improve the on page SEO for long tail queries. It helps a great deal in building good traffic by provision of helpful in depth content.
Hey Rand,
Great WBF!
How about writing a killer blueprint, explaining how to combine all of those suggestions together into actionable reports.
Thank you for the post Rand.
Nice post Rand, thanks!
Really MOZ is very helpful and SEM Rush is such an incredible tool!
Awesome recap. This is essentially a general overview of how to do SEO work month in and month out, supported by tools. Glad to see that I'm not the only one both entranced and frustrated by the data shown in Search Console. On the one hand it's great to get the data directly from Google. On the other hand, it's unclear what % of all data Google has is being shown. With a limit of 1000 queries a month, this could be 100% of query data for a small business, but only 1% for a big brand.
I like how Rand addresses the fact that there's no one super tool out there that solves all these problems...yet. It's up to use to piece together the best tools and customize the process for clients.
All of the services mentioned are quite pricey. And it really seems that it is necessary to have more than one of the services to gather and extract the information needed. This makes it an unlikely solution for smaller agencies and really, really unlikely for someone who might be freelancing. To avoid having my information be more than mostly dead, and since I can't shell out hundreds of dollars on a miracle, let along the mentioned services, I added a filter to my data. Found it on this site a while back and have had good luck with it.
How to steal some 'not provided' data back from Google
B. Graves, SEO Unicorn --:-)
Thanks, Rand. Very useful info. I'd prefer the old Google data but this not gonna happen anymore so we have to find the most optimal variant. Control over SEO is getting more and more difficult nowadays. Google made most of business owners to switch to AdWords instead investing in natural SEO for their websites.
Moz is the place where you can get info about all these great tools.
Always Great to SEE the #WBF by Rand...Each and Every point showing new learning platform for me here...My sites are in same position some time the Search Traffic is increasing dramatically and some time it is going down...I am searching why it is happening I thing this white board show me the path & I will try SEM Rush, Similar Web & Google Analytics to find out the best solutions....Thanks You Rand...
With the disclaimer that I just found this tool a couple of weeks ago and I'm only using the free version (will be upgrading to a pro version after launching my client's new website later this month) -- and while it doesn't address all the "why" questions, ProRankTracker.com could offer a good solution for those who want a deeper analysis + competitive eval - https://proranktracker.com/
Wow.... i had to rewind and start again as the first minute was a blur! Your wig sent me into a daze!
Another great WBF and has provided me with a new tool to try out. As yet I have not used similarWeb, but it sounds pretty cool. As for the other tools, I can definately as Rand suggests, recommend SEMRush and Majestic, they provide so much valuable data to compliment the other tools I currently use.
The bouncing wig made this video ^_^
SEM Rush is such an incredible tool! We use it all the time.
I've been using all tools but Jumpshot and similarweb I have just tried after your blog video watch. But could not get any data from jumpshot.com regarding my website. Its says "The domain you have entered was not found in our database" but similarweb was amazing. I also recomend similarweb Chrome extension gives quick analysis about any website.
Thanks Rand
Hi Rand, thanks for this week's WBF!
At first, I could not focus on following the things you were saying because of those curls - they're magnetic! :)
I think I'm gonna watch, or even better listen, to the video again.
Best,
VS
It's important to track data to compose an effective marketing and SEO plan. Unfortunately, Google has limited our access to certain data points, like detailed keyword information. There are other tools that can give us this data. However, it's also a good idea to determine if this data set is really necessary or if using the tools will create unnecessary clutter.
Its really nice to read you Rand, this one is really horrible that Google hide data whether its about links or traffic but your this practice can take our analysis so far in race.
Lol Rand can you keep the Ranigo Montoya look for every WBF till the end of the year???? I couldn't stop laughing for the first 5 minutes.
Great WBF by the way, attribution is a big thing for us in SEO. Really appreciate the feedback on Similar Web, I've tested it in the past and I've been very skeptic since then. More recently we did some test too and despite the hassle of putting the data sources together I think I will integrate their keyword data.
What method would you recommend to match Similar Web data with Search Analytics data? Would you keep the 2 separate or try to come up with a single dataset to integrate with analytics data?
Thanks for the advice!
Hello Rand,
I am big fan of your WBF, to be very honest with this WBF nothing found interesting with this article it's look like you are advertising other Tools on your WBF. I am expecting awesome tricks & tips to explore SEO Industries
If you want to do that, then start using the tools Rand is talking about.
For instance use the industry analysis (global and by country) by Similarweb or the Domain vs Domain Tool by Semrush
@CommercePundit what an amazing NEGATIVE attitude you have :)