We Sent 750 Organic Clicks To 7 URLs And Heres What Happened

10 replies
  • SEO
  • |
I copied this blog post from a big SEO agency in Toronto: We Sent 750 Organic Clicks To 7 URLs

I think a few of you will enjoy the research...

While Moz and WordTracker have covered the impact of organic click-through rates on the SERPs, we have yet to publish raw data showing our findings, until now.


The theory revolves around the fact that if more people click to your website, and stay on your website (rather than clicking the back button), should you be ranked higher? For example, if a website ranked #5 is getting more click-throughs and a lower bounce rate than site #3 and #4, should the website at #5 be ranked higher because the users are finding more value? We have your answer in this case study.


We tracked 7 keywords and 7 URLs (from 7 different domains) for 19-30 days. These websites ranges from Fortune 50 sites to small local businesses. Campaigns start dates were staggered to avoid duplicate visitors visiting all 7 of the campaigns on the same day from the same IP. Our first campaigns started on September 2nd, while our last one started on September 13th. We concluded our data on October 2nd. The clicks were purchased from SerpClix, the crowdsourced SERP click network. The users were real, not bots, and they were on separate IP addresses and on separate computers. The clickers were worldwide, from all countries. They stayed on the website for 30-60 seconds before closing the tab. None ever clicked the back button, as that would be considered a negative ranking signal.




Video proof: https://youtu.be/y1PKawmJnIU


Overall Results
All 7 of the URLs we studied saw a positive net movement of at least one position within 13 days. Excluding the outlier, 6 of the 7 URLs saw a positive movement within 8 days. 5 of the 7 URLs ended up closing with an overall positive movement over after 30 days.



Keyword Length
4 of the 7 URLs we studied never saw a negative movement. For the month we tracked them, they either stayed neutral, or went up in ranking. All 4 of them finished with a positive overall movement, averaging a gain of 4 positions. These keywords were long tail, made up of 4, 5, 6 and 7 words.



The other 3 URLs that did experience a negative movement at some point in the study, were 2, 3 and 3 words long respectively. While they did experience a negative movement, it was minimal. 2 of the keywords finished down 1 position, while the 3rd keyword was up one position.



Strictly A Positive Ranking Signal
From the resulting net changes, we can conclude that there are no negative signals from CTR manipulation, as the only rank changes were down a single position and all the others were improvements.



Burst vs Drip-fed Clicks
While some people claim that effects of CTR are best observed when the clicks are sent in a burst, we had both cases where drip-fed and blasted campaigns had positive results. If there was movement from a small drip, then the remaining of the drip would hold it there. This made it apparent that a regular, recurring campaign could



Movement By Page
We were able to move keywords on both the first, second and third page of Google. Sending clicks made much more of an effect on the 2nd and 3rd page, simply because the expected CTR on those pages is so low, and theres also a lot of room to move up, of course.



You can view the manual rank check video here: https://youtu.be/y1PKawmJnIU
#750 #clicks #happened #organic #urls
  • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
    Sorry but the study looks worthless. the changes were minor for the most part and could be attributable to anything. I don't know why people waste their time with this CTR nonsense. We already know what makes sites go up after you finish doing good on page

    links
    good links
    contextual links
    strong links


    links links and links.
    Signature

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10918554].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author yukon
    Banned
    Originally Posted by Josh MacDonald View Post

    The clicks were purchased from SerpClix
    Paid link.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10918631].message }}
  • Let's add a real case study to this with real traffic, not some script that simulates human behavior or that runs in a pop under or whatever technique they applied as obviously they don't hire real people.

    On the 15th of October I started to recruit writers for Passive Solutions.

    Traffic source #1: Facebook paid traffic
    Traffic source #2: Problogger
    Traffic source #3: A number of other smaller job boards and forums
    Traffic source #4: Google (organic)

    A few million people saw our advertisements, Facebook being the largest with 2.5 million impressions.

    Total traffic according to Statcounter in the past 30 days: 1686 unique visitors.

    We did attract a number of links from this campaign, all NoFollow though.

    Let's look at our main keyword, which also happens to be the site name: Passive Solutions, and below the rankings according to date, I only wrote down the dates where there was a change in rankings:

    15/10: #8
    16/10: #9
    20/10: #8
    21/10: #9
    25/10: #4
    26/10: #3
    27/10: #4
    28/10: #3
    29/10: #8
    30/10: #4
    31/10: #3
    01/11: #5
    05/11: #4
    06/11: #3
    07/11: #2
    08/11: #4
    09/11: #3
    10/11: #2
    11/11: #4
    12/11: #1
    13/11: #1
    14/11: #1
    15/11: #1

    Google has pretty solid ways to determine if a site is popular or not and I tend to think that goes way beyond CTR's in Googles search results.

    I rank at #1 that's what matters most!
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10918759].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
      Originally Posted by Passive Solutions View Post


      Let's look at our main keyword, which also happens to be the site name: Passive Solutions, !
      Oh come on. You ranked for your name. Given that no one else on the planet wants to "rank' for that name it was only matter of time before it would rank.

      P.S. you have no way of knowing all links were no follow as no tool shows all the links. but then again just having a name and domain name with a term no one wants to compete on is enough to "rank".
      Signature

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10918865].message }}
      • Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

        Oh come on. You ranked for your name. Given that no one else on the planet wants to "rank' for that name it was only matter of time before it would rank.

        P.S. you have no way of knowing all links were no follow as no tool shows all the links. but then again just having a name and domain name with a term no one wants to compete on is enough to "rank".
        The site ranked at #9 for the domain name for six months in a row, when those paid campaigns started the rankings started to improve, all the way up to #1

        Coincidence?
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10919339].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author paulgl
          Originally Posted by Passive Solutions View Post

          The site ranked at #9 for the domain name for six months in a row, when those paid campaigns started the rankings started to improve, all the way up to #1

          Coincidence?
          I think the sig link really took it over the top!

          Paul
          Signature

          If you were disappointed in your results today, lower your standards tomorrow.

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10919471].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
          Originally Posted by Passive Solutions View Post

          The site ranked at #9 for the domain name for six months in a row, when those paid campaigns started the rankings started to improve, all the way up to #1

          Coincidence?
          not coincidence - another factor - aging, a stray followed link you missed or isn't pick ed up by the tools you look at backlinks with. Thats such a weeeeeeak competition term anything could have put it at the the top
          Signature

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10919477].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author yourwarr
    Indeed, main keyword has barely no competitors.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10919075].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author yukon
    Banned
    I hate to be Captain Obvious again, but paid link.

    Always look for the motive.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10919373].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Josh MacDonald
    Good discussion going on here. Let's keep it rolling.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10921461].message }}

Trending Topics