This image from 2006 is getting circulated around the blogosphere right now and for some reason it is the first time I have seen it (credit Seoresearcher.com)
The data represented in the image comes from a Cornell University study on click behavior on search engine result pages. The most interesting point: the difference in clicks between the #1 result and the #2 result is a whopping four times as many clicks for the #1 result! I know from my personal experience with an e commerce website I owned that difference between ranking #1 and #2 for your top keyword can be the difference between breaking even and making hundreds of thousands of dollars. Unfortunately it is not at #1 as the corporate site it ranked for finally caught up. So while I don’t have hard traffic stats out there for the difference in traffic I know it can have a staggering effect on your business.
The point is if you are lurking around #1 but not there yet it can really change your business to strive to get there. If you are there now you better be doing everything you can to preserve it as search engine rankings are only getting more and more competitive every day and if you don’t think someone is out there building links gunning for you spot you are mistaken. Now this being a controlled study and not “out in nature” I would be interested in hearing your thoughts based off real data on the difference between the #1 and #2 spot on Google, what have you seen?
19 comments ↓
A relation to the 80-20 rule. It’s the same in most things that #1 gets the lions share and 2 and 3 basically split the crumbs
[…] Grafik der Cornell University (via Patrick Gavon) zeigt schön die Klickverteilung auf die verschiedenen Platzierungen bei […]
[…] Erstellt wurde diese Statistik von der Cornell University. […]
[…] Patrick Gavin & seoresearcher.com Bookmark […]
i have seen no differance between the #1 ranking and the # 3 ranking which i have both of on very similar keyword indoor decor and indoor decor gifts we still are not selling anything
It’s actually a law of nature, shown explicitly in exponential growth/ decay curves. So it’s not surprising, but it’s good to know.
[…] so wirklich abläuft. Von Cornell University wurde folgende Screenshot veröffentlicht (via Patrick Gavon) und dabei sieht man schön die Klickverteilung mit den jeweiligen Platzierungen bei […]
I would love to see the relationship between position 10 and 11, 12 and 13. I wonder if 11 would actually get as many hits as 10.
[…] Hat tip to Patrick Gavin. […]
Patrick, how do I say this nicely….this chart is a load of sh*t
I see very little difference between 1,2 and 3 - nonetheless 4x as much traffic. And when I’m in the # 5 spot I definitely get more than 1/10th the traffic of the #1 spot.
good to have you blogging….
[…] stehen auch häufiger angeklickt werden. Heute habe ich nun eine schöne Studie zu dem Thema bei Patrick Gavin bzw. SEO Researcher gefunden. Darauf aufmerksam gemacht hat mich übrigens der rote Seo Max. In […]
Interesting diagram and one I have seen before but this is no hard and fast rule.
Depends on the search term itself, whether top spot looks to be relevant etc. Lots of anomolies.
Many people reach number 1 only to realise it’s pretty shitty there too
Got to be a market in the first place!
Echo Gordon’s comments - good to see you blogging.
Stu
i hope this is true - it makes #1 that much more important. i’m at number 2 right now for a certain keyword i’ve been staring at - and this is giving me fuel to go for it.
[…] rates and time spent on site for each of the top 10 positions on the first page of Google results? Here’s a nifty chart. You may be interested in this too: Zappos’ repeat customer/sales per customer data, […]
[…] rates and time spent on site for each of the top 10 positions on the first page of Google results? Here’s a nifty chart. You may be interested in this too: Zappos’ repeat customer/sales per customer data, […]
We all had an idea… but this is profound. Thanks for the great find!
Interesting. Obviously results will vary between markets and search queries. The report mentioned they tested 397 different queries among an assortment of topics. I didn’t see anything about sponsored search though. People looking for information will likely focus on organic listings, where a higher percentage will look at paid search if looking for a product. The graph does not account for paid search nor does it mention how it affected results. Nonetheless, I think we can all agree, the higher, the better.
There is also a split from a few years back which closely mirrors this when Altavista inadvertently released the click data for the first 10 search results. That showed that sites ranked in the top spot got 44% approximately, the next got 15% and it continued on down. 90% approximately of the clicks were on page 1, and almost 10% were spread across the next page of results, sites ranked 11-20. So this seems fairly reliable.
[…] rates and time spent on site for each of the top 10 positions on the first page of Google results? Here’s a nifty chart. You may be interested in this too: Zappos’ repeat customer/sales per customer data, […]
Leave a Comment