PPC vs Organic CTR
-
Hello,
I found two studies that seem to contradict themselves about PPC vs Organic CTR:
http://searchenginewatch.com/article/2200730/Organic-vs.-Paid-Search-Results-Organic-Wins-94-of-Time
http://brandongaille.com/google-organic-click-through-rate-statistics/ Which one is true?Thank you
Cornel -
I have to second Matt - both and neither are probably right. This is an extremely difficult thing to measure, especially at large scale, and only Google has the numbers. Even purely organic CTR studies (not accounting for paid search) show numbers all over the place. The one consistent aspect is that we typically see a similar shaped curve, with a clear preference for #1 and a pretty steep drop-off.
It also appears that one of these studies is based on US data and the other on UK data. The "War on Free Clicks" was a WordStream study, if I recall, so their PPC data is generally pretty solid. It also reflects things like paid shopping results and uses a query set that's a bit more commercial. So, it's probably solid, but it reflects a specific niche.
With the diversity of new SERPs, I think it's vitally important to know your own industry landscape. Organic SERPs now have answer boxes, Knowledge Graph, carousels, expanded site-links, in-depth articles, and many features that can radically alter CTR. There's no "average" answer - it's critical to know the space you operate in.
Ultimately, there are two ways to get a sense of CTR data for yourself. Google Webmaster Tools has some clues - I don't completely trust their data, but it's a good starting point. The other option is simply to run some small-scale PPC campaigns and measure yourself. I've done some PPC work in the past in competitive niches, and I'll be blunt - it's all theory until you get out there and try it. CTR also differs radically across ads, based on copy, brand strength, etc.
-
I think it's equally probable both are right!
There are SO many variables that making a clear case one way or the other is unlikely. For example techies are unlikely to ever click ads - and for many even see them as they'd have AdBlock installed. At the other extreme there's many non web literate folks (yes, even these days) who, frankly, haven't distinguished between ads and organic: Top link = top answer. Even if that link is an ad, or an injected ad due to the malware littering their PC.
In the middle there's a massive group who are aware, see ads and likely choose when / if to click ads. Different intent will lead to different likelihood of clicking ads in different circumstances. If searching for a product to buy I think most people will factor in sponsored results, at least at some point - perhaps organic didn't give the desired results, they want the widest range of products or companies to choose from so open every link, etc.
The Nielsen article seems to be talking more about branded search, certainly not money out searches, whilst the Wordstream infographic is talking of high commercial intent searches - ie money out searches. Unfortunately their sources are a bit small to make out and aren't clickable so I can't look back further.
But given the difference in search intent between the two pieces I'd be comfortable with them both being right!
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
-
Fresh backlinks vs old backlinks: A solid ranking factor?
Hi Moz community, Backlinks being a major ranking factor, do they must be very recent or fresh to make a ranking difference compared to the backlinks which are years old? We know usually fresh content ranks well, but I wonder how much the fresh/recent backlinks impact in rankings. Do the years old backlinks from related and reputed website have same impact on rankings? Thanks
Algorithm Updates | | vtmoz0 -
How to check which site performing well in google organic?
Hi All, Is it possible to check sites via any tool which sites performing good in google organic? Any site ... Is it possible via Alexa? My Concern is majorly for UK Ecommerce site... Thanks!
Algorithm Updates | | pragnesh96390 -
Search Console - Average position vs Page Views
Hello, I would like to find out relation between Average position and Views, one of our sites have strange activity.Average position going up but Views going down in Google Webmaster tools. I mention exactly views to be more specific because clicks could fluctuate due to CTR but views should stay the same. Anyone can describe what could going on ? I notice on other sites that on some days when Average Position drops 50% less than normal views going up on some day, but overall I can not see any relation ship between Average Position and Views.
Algorithm Updates | | logoderivv0 -
Issue with Category Ranking on Page 1 vs. Homepage Ranking on Page 2
A client has a high-volume keyword that is rendering different results, whether it is on page one or page two of Google SERPs. If the keyword is on page one, ONLY the category page is ranking. When the keyword bumps off to page two, BOTH the category AND the homepage are ranking. This is happening on our IP and theirs, incognito and personalized searches. This has been happening since February. Any thought/insights would be greatly appreciated, thank you!!!!
Algorithm Updates | | accpar0 -
Google Sign-In increasing organic encryption keywords?
I am curious how brands that have implemented Google Sign in dealing with the organic encryption keywords. Have encrypted keywords increased after applying Google Sign-in?
Algorithm Updates | | LNEseo
How are you dealing with the missing keyword information?0 -
KML File vs. KMZ File
When should you use a KMZ file? What are the benefits to using a KMZ file as opposed to just a standalone KML file?
Algorithm Updates | | RezStream80 -
Does anybody know of solid statistical examples of websites improving CTR via rich snippets?
There has been a fair deal of broad speculation that "rich snippets improve CTR". The recent rich snippet infographic that SEO Moz came out with mentioned this. However the only solid examples I could find was from an example on Search Engine Land. http://searchengineland.com/how-to-get-a-30-increase-in-ctr-with-structured-markup-105830 Does anybody know of any other success examples with solid data of improved search share CTR rates when rich snippets were implemented?
Algorithm Updates | | southernresearch0 -
Site Usage Statistics and organic ranking
I'm not sure if anyone has tested this properly but i'm begining to suspect that google is using site usage statistics as a site quality guide and ultimately as a ranking variable. The this what i've seen so far on one of my sites (site A) Week 1= bounce rate (83.88%), Avg time on site (0:0:57), Pages/visit (1.28) no changes made to the site apart from the usual link building. Week 2: Traffic drops by 30%, Keywords generating traffic drops by 39%. Bounce rate (87.25%), Avg time on site (0:0:43), pages/visit (1.21). I replaced all affiliate links on my homepage to internal pages where the chunk of the content is and did a reconsideration request. Week 3: Traffic goes up by 30%, keywords generating traffic goes up by 65%, Bounce rate (30.41%), Avg time on site (0:3:02), Pages/visit (3.74). This is not the most scientific test but surely google must be using these variables and a ranking factor? Anyone seen something along these lines or have thoughts on it?
Algorithm Updates | | clickangel0