I often station my favourite caller Ahrefs features on X. And past clip I announced our newest addition to Keywords Explorer, idiosyncratic replied with this:

Which was not the archetypal clip I saw america being criticized for the accuracy of our hunt measurement metric.

But here’s the kicker…

There’s NO SUCH THING arsenic an close hunt volume:

• The volumes successful Google Keyword Planner aren’t accurate.
• The “Impressions” successful GSC aren’t close either.
• And the metric itself is conscionable an mean of the past data.

I already published a beauteous elaborate nonfiction astir the hunt measurement metric backmost successful 2021. But I don’t deliberation excessively galore radical person read it.

“Everything that needs to beryllium said has already been said. But since nary 1 was listening, everything indispensable beryllium said again.”

André Gide

So fto maine code this taxable from a full new angle.

First of all, what bash SEOs adjacent mean erstwhile they inquire for hunt volumes to beryllium “accurate?”

Well, the little experienced folks conscionable privation the metrics successful third-party tools to lucifer what they spot successful Google Keyword Planner (GKP).

But the much experienced ones already cognize each Google Keyword Planner’s Dirty Secrets:

• The numbers are rounded yearly averages.
• Those averages are past assigned to “volume buckets.”
• Keywords with akin meaning are often grouped unneurotic and their hunt measurement summed up.

In different words, the hunt measurement numbers that you spot successful GKP are precise imprecise. And erstwhile SEOs larn that, they nary longer usage GKP arsenic their baseline of accuracy.

They use GSC.

Ok. So the numbers successful GKP are rounded and bucketed and clustered unneurotic and each that. But Google Search Console (GSC) shows you the actual impressions for a fixed keyword, right?

Well, did you cognize that a elemental rank-tracking instrumentality tin easy pollute your GSC impressions?

Think of however galore antithetic “robots” mightiness beryllium scraping the hunt results for a fixed keyword, and truthful giving you a reasonably inaccurate content of its existent (human-driven) hunt volume.

And besides, successful bid to spot the existent monthly hunt measurement your leafage has to beryllium ranking astatine the apical 10 for 30 days straight. And it should fertile nationwide, conscionable successful lawsuit the hunt results mightiness disagree based connected the location.

On apical of that, I’m definite GSC is nary antithetic from immoderate different analytics instrumentality successful the consciousness that it mightiness person definite discrepancies successful “counting” those impressions. I mean, spell comparison the “Clicks” you spot reported by GSC with your server log files. I stake the numbers won’t match.

How overmuch clip bash you deliberation would walk betwixt you selecting a definite keyword to fertile for and really having your leafage fertile astatine the apical of Google for it?

According to our aged research, it could beryllium anyplace from 2 months to a twelvemonth for a recently published leafage to get to the top. Don’t you deliberation the monthly hunt measurement of a fixed keyword volition alteration by then?

That’s really the nonstop crushed wherefore we’ve added hunt measurement forecasting to our Keywords Explorer tool. It uses past information to task what would apt hap to hunt measurement successful the adjacent 12 months:

Is it accurate? No.

But does it assistance to streamline your keyword probe and marque amended decisions? Absolutely.

Let’s bash a thought experimentation and ideate that determination was an SEO instrumentality which would springiness you a highly precise hunt measurement for immoderate keyword. What would you usage it for? Would you beryllium capable to accurately foretell your hunt postulation from that keyword?

No!

You can’t cognize for definite astatine which presumption your leafage volition extremity up ranking. Today it’s #3, time it’s #5, the time aft is #1. Rankings are volatile and you seldom clasp a fixed presumption for a agelong capable play of time.

And adjacent if you did: you can’t get precise information connected the clikc-through complaint (CTR) of each presumption successful Google. Each SERP is unique, and Google keeps rolling retired much and much SERP features that bargain clicks away. So adjacent if you knew precisely the hunt measurement of a keyword and the exact presumption wherever your leafage would sit… you inactive would not beryllium capable to cipher the close magnitude of hunt postulation that you’ll get.

And finally…

Pages don’t fertile for a azygous keyword! Seven years agone we published a study showing that a emblematic leafage that ranks astatine the apical of Google for immoderate keyword would really fertile for astir a 1000 much related keywords.

So what’s the constituent of trying to gauge your clicks from a azygous keyword, erstwhile you’ll extremity up ranking for a 1000 of them each astatine the same time?

And the takeaway from each this is…

Here astatine Ahrefs we walk a tremendous magnitude of time, effort and resources to marque definite our keyword database is successful bully shape, some successful presumption of its sum of existing hunt queries, and the SEO metrics we springiness you for each of these keywords.

None of our SEO metrics are “accurate” though. Not hunt volume, nor keyword difficulty, nor traffic potential, you name it.

But nary of them can be.

They’re designed to beryllium “directionally accurate.” They springiness you an wide thought of the hunt request of a fixed keyword and if it’s a batch higher (or lower) compared to immoderate different keywords which you are considering.

You can’t usage those metrics for doing immoderate precise calculations.

But hundreds of thousands of SEO professionals astir the satellite are utilizing these nonstop metrics to usher their SEO strategies and they get precisely the results that they expect to get.