I've seen some statistical report on how the top ten results are clicked by percentage. I can't find it anymore, can anyone share? It was something like. 1st result - 40% 2nd result - 20% 3rd result - 15% 4th result - 10% etc...
it will vary from keyword to keyword and depends highly on the adWords and other results text. I would be interested to see this report as well however.
When a site is listed on top of SERPs, there's a possibility to generate great traffic however, keywords, title and site description is another factor for the visitors
As the others said it really depends on the keywords! What is sure is that the top 3 gets a fair proportion. For the others, they need to find a eye-catching title + description, so that they will still have clicks. With some competitive requests, only by being on 1st page you're getting a great deal of visits and sometimes the top 3 is composed of Wikipedia and web Portals which are not competitors in many cases, so if you're just after that, it's fine!
Agreed. I always read through the title and sometimes the description rather than jumping to click on #1.
I know the factors that contribute to make your site more appealing even if it's not on the first position. I'm looking here for what I believe was an official google statistical report on how the top 10 results are being clicked.
well heres some of my personal results...for the following positions, using only weekday stats as weekend stats are a little more. position #9 - average of 45 uniques a day position # 7 - average of 56 uniques a day position # 6 - average of 68 uniques a day position # 5 - average of 98 uniques a day all are based on an average of 5 days monday-friday ill let you know when i get to numero uno
Can SERPs be sort of self-feeding monsters? People click the top results because they're the top, though the sites may be useless? I recently tried to email several webmasters on the first page or two of Google's results for a keyword for link enquiries, and most of the sites were horrible 2002-era that were completely useless. None of the people even responded; it wouldn't surprise me if their email addresses weren't checked anymore. And this wasn't a super-obscure niche or anything. There must be better sites on the net for these, I wonder what keeps such sites at the top so long. Apparently age trumps all. QS be damned!
Sure, here you go: Note, this is based on AOL data. Google has never released their statistics, however it still gives a good indication of user habits with 10 ordered results based on millions of different search queries.
Yes, this is it! Thanks! It doesn't really matter if its from aol or google. Things should not differ too much.
That's true. I read a Cornell University study once (I don't have the link, sorry). It had pretty close to the same statistics, maybe even slightly more emphasizing the importance of being in the top three spots. In my SEO efforts I am constantly working to push keywords that are in spots 4-10 up into Google's top three. It will make a large difference in clicks.
I found I got more clicks when I was at the bottom (10th) of the first page as opposed to somewhere in the middle. But once I got to number 1 for this particular keyword, obviously clicks increased.
Actually, 1-3 get about equal clicks. I usually look at all the first 3 results. Besides, sometimes I never even look at number 1 - my eyes first focus in the middle of the page where 2 and 3 are more located. I say 1-3 are all even pretty much.
guess its depend on the market place. I have top 1 position for a certain keywords but it doesn't give lots of traffics.
Very interesting guys cheers for this... i heard 60% 1-3, 20% 4-6 and the rest for the remaining positions