The document discusses evidence that links and traditional ranking factors matter less for the top positions in Google search results. It provides examples showing weaker correlations between domain authority and rankings in the top 5 positions. It also shows how search results can change dramatically for high-volume keywords as Google reassesses search intents. The explanation is that Google prioritizes user experience metrics like time on page and bounce rate over links. The implications are that SEOs should optimize for Google's metrics rather than links alone and focus on price, speed, experience and brand rather than just technical SEO.

1. The Two-Tiered SERP
SearchLove London 2018
Ranking for the Most Competitive Terms

2. @THCapper
The Dreaded Conversation
@THCapper

3. What are your views on Brexit?
Douvres, Brexit, par Banksy (2017) by Paul Bissegger is licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0

4. Why aren’t we first for
{head term}
?!
- your boss, every week

5. @THCapper@THCapper

6. @THCapper@THCapper

7. @THCapper
I was missing something
@THCapper

8. @THCapper@THCapper
https://www.slideshare.net/THCapper/does-google-still-need-link
s-searchlove-san-diego-2017

9. @THCapper
https://www.slideshare.net/THCapper/does-google-still-need-link
s-searchlove-san-diego-2017 @THCapper
Yes,
it does

10. @THCapper
I had part of the answer
@THCapper

11. At the competitive, data-rich top
end, links mean increasingly little
Me, February 2017

12. @THCapper@THCapper
Strength of correlation:
Domain Authority & Rankings
February 2017 October 2018
0.07
0.02

13. SEO in 2018 is winning at user
testing, brand awareness, and
perception
Me, February 2017

14. @THCapper
I was still wrong
@THCapper

15. @THCapper
What if:
Head terms are no longer
about ranking factors
?
@THCapper

16. @THCapper
The
Two-Tiered
SERP
@THCapper
Ranking
Factors
Not Ranking
Factors?

17. @THCapper
Evidence
Explanation
Implications
@THCapper
Agenda

18. Back to basics:
Why might a site rank well?

19. @THCapper
Google is changing
(it’s a cliché)
@THCapper

20. Google in 2017:
31,584 experiments
2,453 search changes
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/09/17/google-tests-changes-to-its-search-algorithm-how-search-works.html

21. @THCapperhttps://moz.com/blog/seo-back-to-basics

22. @THCapper
Why is that site outranking me?
Basic technical

23. @THCapper
● Is it Flash?
● Is there duplicate content?
● Is it noindex?
@THCapper

24. @THCapper
Why is that site outranking me?
Basic technical Targeting

25. @THCapper
● Is the keyword in the title?
● Is the H1 relevant?
● Is there some copy?
@THCapper

26. @THCapper
Why is that site outranking me?
Basic technical
Links
Targeting

27. @THCapper
● Is it linked to internally?
● Is this domain comparable to
competitors?
● Is this spammy?
@THCapper

28. @THCapper
Why is that site outranking me?
Basic technical
Links
Targeting
Hygiene factors

29. @THCapper
● Is it mobile friendly?
● Is it fast?
● Is it keyword-stuffed?
@THCapper

30. @THCapper
2004 Reasonable surfer
2011 Panda
2012 Penguin
2014 Pigeon
2015 Mobilegeddon
@THCapper

31. @THCapper
Building on the old model
@THCapper

32. @THCapper
https://www.slideshare.net/DistilledSEO/searchlove-london-2016-tom-anthony-s
eo-splittesting-how-you-can-run-tests-and-what-weve-learned

33. @THCapper
You sucked
@THCapper

34. @THCapper@THCapper
https://www.slideshare.net/DistilledSEO/searchlove-london-2016-tom-anthony-s
eo-splittesting-how-you-can-run-tests-and-what-weve-learned

35. @THCapper
I scored 0%
@THCapper

36. @THCapper
I scored 0%
...repeatedly
@THCapper

37. I’m a frog
&
Google is a saucepan

38. @THCapper
We are asking the wrong questions
Basic technical
Links
Targeting
Hygiene factors

39. Evidence

40. @THCapper@THCapper
https://www.slideshare.net/THCapper/does-google-still-need-link
s-searchlove-san-diego-2017

41. @THCapper@THCapperhttps://www.slideshare.net/THCapper/does-google-still-need-link
s-searchlove-san-diego-2017

42. @THCapper
Strength of correlation:
Domain Authority & Rankings
May 2015
(Moz)
February 2017
(Me)
0.07
0.26

43. @THCapper
Moz Study My Study
17,600 queries from KWP 4,900 queries from STAT

44. @THCapper
Moz Study My Study
17,600 queries from KWP 4,900 queries from STAT
Top 50 results Top 10 results

45. @THCapper
Moz Study My Study
17,600 queries from KWP 4,900 queries from STAT
Top 50 results Top 10 results
Desktop only (?) Desktop & Smartphone

46. @THCapper
Moz Study My Study
17,600 queries from KWP 4,900 queries from STAT
Top 50 results Top 10 results
Desktop only (?) Desktop & Smartphone
May 2015 Feb 2017, Oct 2018

47. @THCapper
Moz Study My Study
17,600 queries from KWP 4,900 queries from STAT
Top 50 results Top 10 results
Desktop only (?) Desktop & Smartphone
May 2015 Feb 2017, Oct 2018
Mean Spearman correlations Mean Spearman correlations

48. @THCapper
Moz Study My Study
17,600 queries from KWP 4,900 queries from STAT
Top 50 results Top 10 results
Desktop only (?) Desktop & Smartphone
May 2015 Feb 2017, Oct 2018
Mean Spearman correlations Mean Spearman correlations

49. @THCapper
Links are less important
in the top 10?
@THCapper

50. @THCapper
I need a fairer comparison
@THCapper

51. @THCapper
Hypothesis:
The higher you rank,
the less “ranking factors” matter
@THCapper

52. @THCapper
Prediction:
We’ll see a weaker
DA & ranking correlation
in positions 1-5
@THCapper

53. @THCapper@THCapper
Strength of correlation:
Domain Authority & Rankings
May 2015
(Moz)
February 2017
(Me)
0.070
0.260
0.023
October 2018
(Me)

54. @THCapper@THCapper
0.011
6-10

55. @THCapper@THCapper
1-5
0.001
0.011
6-10

56. @THCapper
Hypothesis:
The higher you rank,
the less “ranking factors” matter
@THCapper

57. @THCapper
Hypothesis:
The higher you rank,
the less “ranking factors” matter
@THCapper

58. @THCapper
Caveat:
We only looked
at one factor
@THCapper

59. @THCapper@THCapper
Caveat:
We lack a control

60. @THCapper@THCapperhttps://moz.com/blog/seo-ranking-factors-and-correlation

61. @THCapper
Theory:
Head terms are no longer
about ranking factors
@THCapper

62. @THCapper@THCapper
Evidence:
1. Links less relevant in the top 5

63. @THCapper@THCapper

64. @THCapper
Site DA
1 Interflora 53
2 Flying Flowers 46
3 M&S 82
4 Serenata 56
5 NextFlowers 40
6 eFlorist 44
7 & 8 WaitroseFlorist 42
9 Appleyard 44
Rankings 2 weeks before Mother’s Day

65. @THCapper
Site DA BSV
1 Interflora 53 212,000
2 Flying Flowers 46 24,000
3 M&S 82 3,060,000
4 Serenata 56 5,000
5 NextFlowers 40 4,850,000
6 eFlorist 44 16,000
7 & 8 WaitroseFlorist 42 924,000
9 Appleyard 44 1,700
Rankings 2 weeks before Mother’s Day

66. @THCapper
Site DA BSV Specialist?
1 Interflora 53 212,000 Yes
2 Flying Flowers 46 24,000 Yes
3 M&S 82 3,060,000 No
4 Serenata 56 5,000 Yes
5 NextFlowers 40 4,850,000 Ish
6 eFlorist 44 16,000 Yes
7 & 8 WaitroseFlorist 42 924,000 Ish
9 Appleyard 44 1,700 Yes
Rankings 2 weeks before Mother’s Day

67. @THCapper
Nice rankings...
shame if something
happened to them.
@THCapper

68. @THCapper
Keyword: Mother’s day flowers

69. @THCapper
Keyword: Mother’s day flowers

70. @THCapper
Keyword: Mother’s day flowers

71. @THCapper
Keyword: Mother’s day flowers

72. @THCapper
Keyword: Mother’s day flowers

73. @THCapper
Keyword: Mother’s day flowers

74. @THCapper
Keyword: Mother’s day flowers

75. @THCapper
Keyword: Mother’s day flowers

76. @THCapper
Keyword: Mother’s day flowers

77. @THCapper
Keyword: Mother’s day flowers

78. @THCapper
Keyword: Mother’s day flowers

79. @THCapper
Keyword: Mother’s day flowers

80. @THCapper
Keyword: Mother’s day flowers

81. @THCapper
Keyword: Mother’s day flowers

82. @THCapper
Keyword: Mother’s day flowers

83. @THCapper
Keyword: Mother’s day flowers

84. @THCapper
Keyword: Mother’s day flowers
Offline brands:
Doing pretty well

85. @THCapper
Keyword: Mother’s day flowers
Offline brands:
Doing pretty well

86. @THCapper
Eflorist & Serenata:
Strong domains you never heard of, the “SEO” winners
Keyword: Mother’s day flowers

87. @THCapper
Why is that site outranking me?
Basic technical
Links
Targeting
Hygiene factors

88. @THCapper
Flying Flowers & Appleyard
Small brands, small domains, clung on
Keyword: Mother’s day flowers

89. @THCapper
Flying Flowers & Appleyard
Small brands, small domains, clung on

90. @THCapper
Flying Flowers & Appleyard
Small brands, small domains, clung on

91. @THCapper
Flying Flowers & Appleyard
Small brands, small domains, clung on

92. @THCapper
Flying Flowers & Appleyard
Small brands, small domains, clung on

93. @THCapper
Flying Flowers & Appleyard
Small brands, small domains, clung on

94. @THCapper
Flying Flowers & Appleyard
Small brands, small domains, clung on

95. @THCapper
Flying Flowers & Appleyard
Small brands, small domains, clung on

96. @THCapper
Flying Flowers
Simple, price-orientated, emphasis on free delivery

97. @THCapper
Site DA BSV Specialist? Change
WaitroseFlorist 42 924,000 Ish +7
M&S 82 3,060,000 No +4
Winners

98. @THCapper
Losers
Site DA BSV Specialist? Change
eFlorist 44 16,000 Yes -5
Serenata 56 5,000 Yes -16

99. @THCapper
Hangers on
Site DA BSV Specialist? Change
Interflora 53 212,000 Yes -2
Flying Flowers 46 24,000 Yes -2
NextFlowers 40 4,850,000 Ish 0
Appleyard 44 1,700 Yes 0

100. @THCapper@THCapper
Theory:
Head terms are no longer
about ranking factors

101. @THCapper@THCapper
Evidence:
1. Links less relevant in the top 5
2. SERPs change when they
become high volume

102. @THCapper
Intent
@THCapper

103. @THCapper
Medic update: Winners
Site Visibility
NHS +4.6%
WebMB +6.5%
Healthline +3.5%
Bupa +4.9%
Cosmopolitan +4.6%
Elle +3.6%

104. @THCapper
Medic update: Winners
Site Visibility
NHS +4.6%
WebMB +6.5%
Healthline +3.5%
Bupa +4.9%
Cosmopolitan +4.6%
Elle +3.6%

105. @THCapper
Medic update: Winners
Site Visibility
NHS +4.6%
WebMB +6.5%
Healthline +3.5%
Bupa +4.9%
Cosmopolitan +4.6%
Elle +3.6%

106. @THCapper
Medic update: Winners
Site Visibility
NHS +4.6%
WebMB +6.5%
Healthline +3.5%
Bupa +4.9%
Cosmopolitan +4.6%
Elle +3.6%

107. @THCapper
-20% traffic
@THCapper

108. Revenue impact?

109. @THCapper@THCapper
Theory:
Head terms are no longer
about ranking factors

110. @THCapper@THCapper
Evidence:
1. Links less relevant in the top 5
2. SERPs change when they
become high volume
3. Google is re-assessing intents
for established keywords

111. Explanation

112. @THCapper
Why is this
happening?
@THCapper

113. @THCapper
Let’s practice
some empathy
@THCapper

114. “what percent of users clicked
through a picture-link and then
quickly clicked back”
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/09/17/google-tests-changes-to-its-search-algorithm-how-search-works.html

115. @THCapper@THCapper
KPI 1: Pogo-stick rate

116. “whether there was a significant
increase in the time until they made
their first interaction”
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/09/17/google-tests-changes-to-its-search-algorithm-how-search-works.html

117. @THCapper@THCapper
KPI 1:
KPI 2:
Pogo-stick rate
Time to SERP interaction

118. @THCapper@THCapper
Do links get you this?
KPI 1:
KPI 2:
Pogo-stick rate
Time to SERP interaction

119. @THCapper
Reminder: Links are a proxy
for popularity & trust
@THCapper

120. @THCapper
Potential factors:
- Price
- Aesthetics
- Short-sighted interstitials
@THCapper

121. What should you do about it?

122. Don’t tweet this:
@THCapper

123. The fundamentals still work

124. @THCapper
“Online”
@THCapper

125. @THCapper@THCapper
Removed “online”
Added back
“online”

126. @THCapper
Optimise for
Google’s metrics
@THCapper

127. @THCapper@THCapper
KPI 1:
KPI 2:
Pogo-stick rate
Time to SERP interaction

128. @THCapper
What impacts
pogo sticking?
@THCapper

129. @THCapper
https://youtu.be/At51X-aZ4Y4
First Impressions

130. @THCapper
Price

131. @THCapper
Pop-ups

132. @THCapper
Pagespeed
https://www.thinkwithgoogle.com/feature/mobile/

133. @THCapper@THCapper
KPI 1:
KPI 2:
Pogo-stick rate
Time to SERP interaction

134. @THCapper
What impacts SERP
behaviour?
@THCapper

135. @THCapper
MetaData

136. @THCapper
Brand

137. @THCapper
“But I can’t do anything
about brand”
@THCapper

138. @THCapper

139. @THCapper

140. @THCapper
Or just run ads!
@THCapper

141. @THCapper
What about existing
customers?
@THCapper

142. @THCapper
Don’t piss people off
@THCapper

143. @THCapper@THCapper

144. @THCapper
“How can a chicken shop measure brand?”
● Branded search
● Social following
● Survey data
https://www.distilled.net/resources/measuring-brand-awareness/

145. @THCapper
What about intent?
@THCapper

146. @THCapper
Be ready
@THCapper

147. @THCapper@THCapper

148. What have we learnt?

149. @THCapper@THCapper
Takeaways:
1. The game has changed
2. Inherit Google’s KPIs
3. But don’t abandon the
foundations just yet

150. Thank You