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
-
Http vs Https Related Rankings Drop?
I've noticed in a number of keyword ranking tools (Moz included) that our rankings have dropped substantially for a number of our top performing keywords precisely 7 days back. When you view the attached screenshot you'll see there was a drastic drop in the overall organic impressions as well as a drop in keyword rankings. I also noticed that all the keywords which have dropped in rank now show with the https version of our home page url. I've read up on this and it believe that this should not cause a drop in rankings but we have even added https as a domain in webmaster tools with no improvement. Quite simply, has Google de-indexed our http home page url which was previously tied to our higher rankings for our core keywords? How can we get this back without "disavowing" our https version of the site. We're not doing anything to game search results so I dont think we're being penalized, simply there is some sort technical glitch taking place between recognizing HTTP vs HTTPS versions of our site. Our home page is goo.gl/qVPRwf and an example keyword is "wedding ring sets his and hers" Can anyone recommend further debugging steps or have an understanding of what can be done at this point? Also, if it helps, I have studied the Help Center, read the FAQs and searched for similar questions with no success.wedding ring sets his and hers impressions%20-%20ranking%20drop.png?dl=0
Algorithm Updates | | punitshah0 -
Our organic search traffic went flat for 2 weeks Oct 2 - Oct 17\. It has since resumed to more normal numbers. Anyone have any idea why this would happen?
Does anyone have any insight as to why our organic search traffic would go to nearly nothing for roughly a 2 week span Oct 2 - Oct 17th? Our regular traffic remained fairly consistent so we were still being indexed. It has now resumed to more normal numbers but I cannot think of anything we did that would make this happen? We did make a 302 switch to be a 301 permanent redirect on our site in early August but that is all I can think of? Any insight or help would be appreciated!
Algorithm Updates | | mwuest0 -
Website dance on Google Map results and organic seo results
My website is daily showing different position on maps.google.com and for the last few days like yesterday it was on 21st position on some keyword and today it is no where and same with other keywords. Is this a Google Dance ?? what can be its period ? and what is tyhe solution to handle it ??
Algorithm Updates | | mnkpso0 -
Organic Traffic dropped 50%. Anyone want to have a stab at why? (URL listed)
Just curious what the pro's on here think is the reason why our site got hammered recently. The URL is www.jobshadow.com. We've got gobs of quality content that had been ranking for quite a few keywords. Even one from Rand himself http://www.jobshadow.com/interview-with-seo-and-seomoz-founder-rand-fishkin/ Rankings for even the exact match domain keyword 'Job Shadow' have been pummeled. Anyway, we've got a pretty solid link profile I would think. We also have a very high user time on the site, thus suggesting the organic traffic was engaged when Google ranked us for those keywords. We have lots of unsolicited inbound links and even recent ones from PBS. I'm not really sure what it takes to please the "machine" at this point. Curious as to what everyone here thinks.
Algorithm Updates | | arkana0 -
Local Listings vs. Spreading Too Thin
Hello SEO Community, I'm trying to find the right balance between adapting to Googles move towards local listings and not spreading out my site too thin. We provide our services nationally and currently have local city listings (i.e. http://www.cleanedison.com/courses/city/IL-Chicago) but these do not show up in the SERPs for individual products + city (i.e. Building Analyst Chicago) So I could make individual pages for each product in each city, but that would exponentially increase the number of URLs on the site and probably inundate me with duplicate content. Is there a better way I could take advantage of local listings without creating all the duplicate content and other problems that would arise with individual URLs? Thanks
Algorithm Updates | | CleanEdisonInc0 -
Queries vs Keywords
Can anyone clarify why my list of queries from google webmaster tools varies so much from the keywords that have resulted in clicks? I have a site that, according to Google analytics, has had clicks from 125 key phrases where as in webmaster tools (via analytics) allegedly only 17 queries have resulted in clicks. Is it becuase GA can't handle less than 5 clicks from the webmaster data or is it something else I am missing? The site I am researching for has very little traffic from other search engines.
Algorithm Updates | | SoundinTheory0 -
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