SEO

Should You Target Zero-Volume Keywords? It Depends

Published

2 years ago

October 21, 2022

Should You Target Zero-Volume Keywords? It Depends

If your keyword tool says nobody’s searching for a keyword, should you bother targeting it?

Although the obvious answer is “no,” there’s been a lot of chatter about the benefits of targeting zero-volume keywords among SEOs.

So what gives? Is there any logical reason to do this, or is it just another overhyped SEO trend?

In this post, we’ll discuss four perceived benefits of targeting low-volume keywords and why they’re not always so black and white.

It’s no secret that search volumes in keyword research tools aren’t perfect.

For example, the keyword “hreflang tag seo” gets an estimated 10 monthly searches in the U.S., according to Ahrefs’ Keywords Explorer.

Estimated U.S. monthly search volume for "hreflang tag seo"

Sidenote.

Semrush gave the same search volume estimate.

But as we rank in the top five for this keyword, we can get a more accurate estimation by looking at our impressions in Google Search Console (GSC). If we do that for the last 28 days in the U.S., we see 20 impressions.

Monthly impressions for the Ahrefs Blog for "hreflang tag seo"

Based on this data, we can see 2X more searches for this keyword during the period than what Ahrefs or Semrush estimated. This seems to back up the idea that zero-volume keywords probably get some searches and are worth targeting.

Is it really this simple?

Not quite. Most zero-volume keywords get some searches. But expecting tons of traffic from one is a bit like expecting rain when the forecast says sunny skies. It can happen, but it probably won’t.

That said, I think most advocates of zero-volume keywords are aware of this fact. They simply don’t care, as they don’t need a 100% hit rate. They just need a percentage of those they target to outperform estimates.

In theory, that makes sense. But how decent is the hit rate likely to be?

To help find out, I ran a (very) small experiment.

I found all “top five” keyword rankings for the Ahrefs Blog that had an estimated monthly search volume of 10 or lower in the U.S. I used the Organic keywords report in Ahrefs’ Site Explorer to do this.
I compared those search volume estimates to impressions data in Google Search Console for the last 28 days in the U.S.

The result? Most of the keywords drove the same or fewer impressions than their estimated search volumes in Ahrefs. Even worse, less than 1% of them drove more than 100 impressions.

Very few zero-volume keywords drive more than 100 monthly impressions

This means the chance of a low- or zero-volume keyword getting significantly more searches than estimated is extremely low.

In fact, on average, each keyword drove 11.3 impressions.

That’s a super interesting number because it’s pretty much dead-on the average monthly search volumes of these keywords. In other words, the data seems to indicate that, on average, low- and zero-volume keywords get very close to the number of monthly searches Ahrefs predicts.

disclaimer

These findings are based on quite a small sample size, so take them with a grain of salt. They may not be representative of every industry or group of topics.

Given this revelation, you may ask yourself, “Why do I keep seeing claims of zero-volume keywords driving lots of traffic?”

From what I’ve seen, it’s almost always a result of people conflating traffic from a single keyword with a page’s overall traffic.

Here’s just one example I saw in this excellent post by Tory Gray:

LinkedIn post about zero-volume keywords

I wouldn’t like to say for definite, but my guess is that the zero-volume keyword this person is referring to is just an unpopular way of searching for something popular.

For example, Ahrefs estimates that the keyword “submit domain to search engines” gets 10 monthly searches in the U.S. Yet our search engine submission guide gets an estimated 3.8K monthly search visits.

Estimated U.S. monthly search volume for "submit domain to search engines"

Estimated monthly U.S. search traffic for our post about submitting your site to search engines

This happens because “submit domain to search engines” is an unpopular way of searching for a popular topic. It’s just that everyone types slightly different things into Google, so individual search volumes are low.

Our page gets lots of search traffic because it ranks for hundreds of long-tail keywords that all mean pretty much the same thing.

Some of the many keywords our post about submitting a website to search engines ranks on the first page of Google for

key takeaway

Most low- and zero-volume keywords get roughly the same number of monthly searches as estimated. There are just some outliers. Many claims of pages targeting zero-volume keywords getting lots of traffic likely happen because the keyword is a long-tail variation of a popular topic.

Given that most SEOs target high-volume keywords, it’s pretty obvious that low- or zero-volume keywords will be less competitive on the whole.

For example, according to Ahrefs’ Keywords Explorer, the keyword “link building” gets an estimated 14K monthly searches in the U.S. So it’s no surprise that it’s also extremely competitive, with a Keyword Difficulty (KD) score of 87.

Estimated U.S. monthly search volume for "link building"

Compare this to a zero-volume keyword about a similar topic, “link building for roofers,” and it’s a completely different story. Its KD score is 0.

Estimated U.S. monthly search volume for "link building for roofers"

Given this observation, it seems clear that low- and zero-volume keywords are easier to rank for.

Is it really this simple?

Not quite. Although many low- or zero-volume keywords are indeed much easier to rank for, many of them are unpopular ways of searching for something popular.

The keyword we discussed before, “submit domain to search engines,” is a perfect example of this. It only gets an estimated 10 monthly searches, but it’s no easier to rank for when compared to a more popular way of searching for the same thing.

Keyword Difficulty (KD) scores for two similar keywords, one of which is a low-volume keyword

This happens because Google understands that both of these queries mean the same thing, so it ranks an almost identical set of search results for both queries.

Most of the top-ranking pages for "submit domain to search engines" and "submit website to search engines" are the same

In Ahrefs, there are a couple of metrics you can use to help figure out whether a zero-volume keyword is its own topic or a long-tail variation of a popular keyword.

Keyword Difficulty (KD) – Keywords with high KD scores have top-ranking pages with many backlinks. Given that this isn’t usually the case for unpopular topics, a zero-volume keyword with a low KD score likely represents its own topic.
Traffic Potential (TP) score – Traffic Potential is the estimated monthly search traffic to the current top-ranking page for a keyword. If this is much higher than a keyword’s estimated search volume, it shows there are other more popular ways of searching for the same thing.

Here’s an example of Traffic Potential in action:

Estimated U.S. Traffic Potential for "submit domain to search engines"

key takeaway

Not all zero-volume keywords are easy to rank for. If they’re less popular ways of searching for something popular, they’re probably no easier to rank for than their “head” terms.

Most high-volume keywords are quite broad, which makes it hard to create content around them to please all searchers.

For example, take the keyword “ecommerce SEO.” Judging by the SERP, the broad intent behind this keyword seems obvious: Searchers want a guide that teaches them how to get more traffic to their stores.

People searching for "ecommerce seo" want a guide

But unfortunately, it’s hard to give SEO advice that applies to all searchers because the query doesn’t tell us enough about their situation. There are too many variables, such as:

Are they setting up their store, or is it already live?
Are they selling branded or non-branded products?
Are they using Shopify, WooCommerce, or something else?

Compare this to a zero-volume keyword about a similar topic like “how to structure an ecommerce site for SEO.” Here, the searcher is trying to achieve a much more specific goal, which makes this (and other low-volume keywords) easier to answer with content.

Is it really this simple?

Kind of. Assuming the zero-volume keyword represents its own topic and isn’t just a less popular way of searching for something popular, I’d say it’s almost always quite specific and easier to create content around.

That said, specificity isn’t exactly a unique quality of low- or zero-volume keywords. There are plenty of high-volume keywords with very specific and obvious intents too; they’re just less common.

For example, take the keyword “submit website to search engines.” Despite a monthly search volume of 450, it’s pretty obvious from the SERP and the query itself that searchers want to learn how to submit their sites to search engines.

People searching for "submit website to search engines" want to know how to submit their websites

Given that the process of submitting to search engines is the same for every website, it’s easy to create content that will please almost all searchers.

key takeaway

Most zero-volume keywords that represent their own topics are quite specific and easy to create content around. But that’s also true of some higher-volume keywords.

Not only is it easier to create content for more specific searches, but they also often convert better.

For example, take a keyword like “broken link building.” Even though this isn’t a particularly high-volume keyword, it’s clear from the SERP that intent is informational. Most searchers want to learn how to use this technique, not buy broken link building services.

People searching for "broken link building" want to learn

Compare this to a zero-volume keyword about the same topic like “buy broken link building services,” and it’s a different story. Searchers are clearly looking to buy, not learn.

People searching for "buy broken link building services" want to buy

Is it really this simple?

Not quite. Although low- and zero-volume keywords are perhaps more likely to be BoFu, it’s not a given. Plenty of zero-volume keywords are far from lucrative.

For example, take the zero-volume keyword “how to copy a picture on facebook without tagging.” Even if actual search volume is way higher than estimated, you’re hardly going to drive conversions from this keyword.

key takeaway

Not all low- and zero-volume keywords convert well. It depends on the intent behind them.

Final thoughts

It doesn’t make much sense to hunt down and target “zero-volume keywords” when there are plenty with search volumes ripe for the taking.

However, there are a couple of times when targeting a zero-volume keyword may make sense:

You come across a trending topic that you think has legs – Even if there’s no reported search volume yet, it’s often worth creating a page to get in first.
You come across a lucrative topic with the potential to convert visitors – Even a few visits from these keywords can be worth $$$$, so why not create a page around it and see what happens?

Got questions? Disagree with me? Ping me on Twitter.

Source link

Related Topics:Depends Keywords seo Target ZeroVolume

Up Next

Scale Your B2B Lead Generation With Discovery Ads

Don't Miss

LinkedIn Adds Automatic Captions To Videos

Click to comment

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

SEO

Client-Side Vs. Server-Side Rendering

Published

13 hours ago

September 19, 2024

Max

Faster webpage loading times play a big part in user experience and SEO, with page load speed a key determining factor for Google’s algorithm.

A front-end web developer must decide the best way to render a website so it delivers a fast experience and dynamic content.

Two popular rendering methods include client-side rendering (CSR) and server-side rendering (SSR).

All websites have different requirements, so understanding the difference between client-side and server-side rendering can help you render your website to match your business goals.

Google & JavaScript

Google has extensive documentation on how it handles JavaScript, and Googlers offer insights and answer JavaScript questions regularly through various formats – both official and unofficial.

For example, in a Search Off The Record podcast, it was discussed that Google renders all pages for Search, including JavaScript-heavy ones.

This sparked a substantial conversation on LinkedIn, and another couple of takeaways from both the podcast and proceeding discussions are that:

Google doesn’t track how expensive it is to render specific pages.
Google renders all pages to see content – regardless if it uses JavaScript or not.

The conversation as a whole has helped to dispel many myths and misconceptions about how Google might have approached JavaScript and allocated resources.

Martin Splitt’s full comment on LinkedIn covering this was:

“We don’t keep track of “how expensive was this page for us?” or something. We know that a substantial part of the web uses JavaScript to add, remove, change content on web pages. We just have to render, to see it all. It doesn’t really matter if a page does or does not use JavaScript, because we can only be reasonably sure to see all content once it’s rendered.”

Martin also confirmed a queue and potential delay between crawling and indexing, but not just because something is JavaScript or not, and it’s not an “opaque” issue that the presence of JavaScript is the root cause of URLs not being indexed.

General JavaScript Best Practices

Before we get into the client-side versus server-side debate, it’s important that we also follow general best practices for either of these approaches to work:

Don’t block JavaScript resources through Robots.txt or server rules.
Avoid render blocking.
Avoid injecting JavaScript in the DOM.

What Is Client-Side Rendering, And How Does It Work?

Client-side rendering is a relatively new approach to rendering websites.

It became popular when JavaScript libraries started integrating it, with Angular and React.js being some of the best examples of libraries used in this type of rendering.

It works by rendering a website’s JavaScript in your browser rather than on the server.

The server responds with a bare-bones HTML document containing the JS files instead of getting all the content from the HTML document.

While the initial upload time is a bit slow, the subsequent page loads will be rapid as they aren’t reliant on a different HTML page per route.

From managing logic to retrieving data from an API, client-rendered sites do everything “independently.” The page is available after the code is executed because every page the user visits and its corresponding URL are created dynamically.

The CSR process is as follows:

The user enters the URL they wish to visit in the address bar.
A data request is sent to the server at the specified URL.
On the client’s first request for the site, the server delivers the static files (CSS and HTML) to the client’s browser.
The client browser will download the HTML content first, followed by JavaScript. These HTML files connect the JavaScript, starting the loading process by displaying loading symbols the developer defines to the user. At this stage, the website is still not visible to the user.
After the JavaScript is downloaded, content is dynamically generated on the client’s browser.
The web content becomes visible as the client navigates and interacts with the website.

What Is Server-Side Rendering, And How Does It Work?

Server-side rendering is the more common technique for displaying information on a screen.

The web browser submits a request for information from the server, fetching user-specific data to populate and sending a fully rendered HTML page to the client.

Every time the user visits a new page on the site, the server will repeat the entire process.

Here’s how the SSR process goes step-by-step:

The user enters the URL they wish to visit in the address bar.
The server serves a ready-to-be-rendered HTML response to the browser.
The browser renders the page (now viewable) and downloads JavaScript.
The browser executes React, thus making the page interactable.

What Are The Differences Between Client-Side And Server-Side Rendering?

The main difference between these two rendering approaches is in the algorithms of their operation. CSR shows an empty page before loading, while SSR displays a fully-rendered HTML page on the first load.

This gives server-side rendering a speed advantage over client-side rendering, as the browser doesn’t need to process large JavaScript files. Content is often visible within a couple of milliseconds.

Search engines can crawl the site for better SEO, making it easy to index your webpages. This readability in the form of text is precisely the way SSR sites appear in the browser.

However, client-side rendering is a cheaper option for website owners.

It relieves the load on your servers, passing the responsibility of rendering to the client (the bot or user trying to view your page). It also offers rich site interactions by providing fast website interaction after the initial load.

Fewer HTTP requests are made to the server with CSR, unlike in SSR, where each page is rendered from scratch, resulting in a slower transition between pages.

SSR can also buckle under a high server load if the server receives many simultaneous requests from different users.

The drawback of CSR is the longer initial loading time. This can impact SEO; crawlers might not wait for the content to load and exit the site.

This two-phased approach raises the possibility of seeing empty content on your page by missing JavaScript content after first crawling and indexing the HTML of a page. Remember that, in most cases, CSR requires an external library.

When To Use Server-Side Rendering

If you want to improve your Google visibility and rank high in the search engine results pages (SERPs), server-side rendering is the number one choice.

E-learning websites, online marketplaces, and applications with a straightforward user interface with fewer pages, features, and dynamic data all benefit from this type of rendering.

When To Use Client-Side Rendering

Client-side rendering is usually paired with dynamic web apps like social networks or online messengers. This is because these apps’ information constantly changes and must deal with large and dynamic data to perform fast updates to meet user demand.

The focus here is on a rich site with many users, prioritizing the user experience over SEO.

Which Is Better: Server-Side Or Client-Side Rendering?

When determining which approach is best, you need to not only take into consideration your SEO needs but also how the website works for users and delivers value.

Think about your project and how your chosen rendering will impact your position in the SERPs and your website’s user experience.

Generally, CSR is better for dynamic websites, while SSR is best suited for static websites.

Content Refresh Frequency

Websites that feature highly dynamic information, such as gambling or FOREX websites, update their content every second, meaning you’d likely choose CSR over SSR in this scenario – or choose to use CSR for specific landing pages and not all pages, depending on your user acquisition strategy.

SSR is more effective if your site’s content doesn’t require much user interaction. It positively influences accessibility, page load times, SEO, and social media support.

On the other hand, CSR is excellent for providing cost-effective rendering for web applications, and it’s easier to build and maintain; it’s better for First Input Delay (FID).

Another CSR consideration is that meta tags (description, title), canonical URLs, and Hreflang tags should be rendered server-side or presented in the initial HTML response for the crawlers to identify them as soon as possible, and not only appear in the rendered HTML.

Platform Considerations

CSR technology tends to be more expensive to maintain because the hourly rate for developers skilled in React.js or Node.js is generally higher than that for PHP or WordPress developers.

Additionally, there are fewer ready-made plugins or out-of-the-box solutions available for CSR frameworks compared to the larger plugin ecosystem that WordPress users have access too.

For those considering a headless WordPress setup, such as using Frontity, it’s important to note that you’ll need to hire both React.js developers and PHP developers.

This is because headless WordPress relies on React.js for the front end while still requiring PHP for the back end.

It’s important to remember that not all WordPress plugins are compatible with headless setups, which could limit functionality or require additional custom development.

Website Functionality & Purpose

Sometimes, you don’t have to choose between the two as hybrid solutions are available. Both SSR and CSR can be implemented within a single website or webpage.

For example, in an online marketplace, pages with product descriptions can be rendered on the server, as they are static and need to be easily indexed by search engines.

Staying with ecommerce, if you have high levels of personalization for users on a number of pages, you won’t be able to SSR render the content for bots, so you will need to define some form of default content for Googlebot which crawls cookieless and stateless.

Pages like user accounts don’t need to be ranked in the search engine results pages (SERPs), so a CRS approach might be better for UX.

Both CSR and SSR are popular approaches to rendering websites. You and your team need to make this decision at the initial stage of product development.

More resources:

Featured Image: TippaPatt/Shutterstock

Source link

SEO

HubSpot Rolls Out AI-Powered Marketing Tools

Published

1 day ago

September 18, 2024

Max

HubSpot Rolls Out AI-Powered Marketing Tools

HubSpot announced a push into AI this week at its annual Inbound marketing conference, launching “Breeze.”

Breeze is an artificial intelligence layer integrated across the company’s marketing, sales, and customer service software.

According to HubSpot, the goal is to provide marketers with easier, faster, and more unified solutions as digital channels become oversaturated.

Karen Ng, VP of Product at HubSpot, tells Search Engine Journal in an interview:

“We’re trying to create really powerful tools for marketers to rise above the noise that’s happening now with a lot of this AI-generated content. We might help you generate titles or a blog content…but we do expect kind of a human there to be a co-assist in that.”

Breeze AI Covers Copilot, Workflow Agents, Data Enrichment

The Breeze layer includes three main components.

Breeze Copilot

An AI assistant that provides personalized recommendations and suggestions based on data in HubSpot’s CRM.

Ng explained:

“It’s a chat-based AI companion that assists with tasks everywhere – in HubSpot, the browser, and mobile.”

Breeze Agents

A set of four agents that can automate entire workflows like content generation, social media campaigns, prospecting, and customer support without human input.

Ng added the following context:

“Agents allow you to automate a lot of those workflows. But it’s still, you know, we might generate for you a content backlog. But taking a look at that content backlog, and knowing what you publish is still a really important key of it right now.”

Breeze Intelligence

Combines HubSpot customer data with third-party sources to build richer profiles.

Ng stated:

“It’s really important that we’re bringing together data that can be trusted. We know your AI is really only as good as the data that it’s actually trained on.”

Addressing AI Content Quality

While prioritizing AI-driven productivity, Ng acknowledged the need for human oversight of AI content:

“We really do need eyes on it still…We think of that content generation as still human-assisted.”

Marketing Hub Updates

Beyond Breeze, HubSpot is updating Marketing Hub with tools like:

Content Remix to repurpose videos into clips, audio, blogs, and more.
AI video creation via integration with HeyGen
YouTube and Instagram Reels publishing
Improved marketing analytics and attribution

The announcements signal HubSpot’s AI-driven vision for unifying customer data.

But as Ng tells us, “We definitely think a lot about the data sources…and then also understand your business.”

HubSpot’s updates are rolling out now, with some in public beta.

Featured Image: Poetra.RH/Shutterstock

Source link

SEO

Holistic Marketing Strategies That Drive Revenue [SaaS Case Study]

Published

2 days ago

September 18, 2024

Max

Holistic Marketing Strategies That Drive Revenue [SaaS Case Study]

Brands are seeing success driving quality pipeline and revenue growth. It’s all about building an intentional customer journey, aligning sales + marketing, plus measuring ROI.

Check out this executive panel on-demand, as we show you how we do it.

With Ryann Hogan, senior demand generation manager at CallRail, and our very own Heather Campbell and Jessica Cromwell, we chatted about driving demand, lead gen, revenue, and proper attribution.

This B2B leadership forum provided insights you can use in your strategy tomorrow, like:

The importance of the customer journey, and the keys to matching content to your ideal personas.
How to align marketing and sales efforts to guide leads through an effective journey to conversion.
Methods to measure ROI and determine if your strategies are delivering results.

While the case study is SaaS, these strategies are for any brand.

Watch on-demand and be part of the conversation.

Join Us For Our Next Webinar!

Navigating SERP Complexity: How to Leverage Search Intent for SEO

Join us live as we break down all of these complexities and reveal how to identify valuable opportunities in your space. We’ll show you how to tap into the searcher’s motivation behind each query (and how Google responds to it in kind).

Source link