There are two sources of key phrase search quantity knowledge that come straight from Google: Google Search Console (GSC) and Google Key phrase Planner (GKP). We determined to check the numbers between the 2 and see how a lot they align.

GSC is extensively thought of the “single supply of reality” for correct key phrase knowledge as a result of it reveals you the precise variety of occasions your web page appeared in Google’s search outcomes for a particular key phrase.

So in case your web page constantly ranks on the entrance web page of Google for a given search question, the variety of impressions for that question in GSC ought to precisely mirror the search quantity (in most circumstances).

As for GKP, its search quantity knowledge is understood to be lots much less exact. Primarily as a result of:

  • It teams key phrases with related which means.
  • It rounds search volumes into buckets.

And but, a variety of search engine marketing professionals are completely proud of the search volumes they get from GKP and think about them to be correct.

So we determined to run a little bit experiment and research how search volumes from GKP stack up in opposition to the “single supply of reality,” aka GSC.

Evaluating search volumes between GSC and GKP

For this experiment, we took 72,635 random key phrases within the 1K to 10K search quantity vary. Then we in contrast the variety of “impressions” in GSC with the search quantity knowledge from GKP (for a similar month).

The very first thing we discovered is that GKP virtually at all times overestimates “true” search quantity:

Bar chart showing 91.45% of search volumes in GKP are overestimates

However the actual query is by how a lot? In any case, if it solely overestimates search volumes barely, then what’s the massive deal?

Right here’s the reply:

Bar chart where GKP drastically overestimates search volumes 54.28% of the time, is roughly accurate 45.22% of the time

Most search volumes in GKP (54.28%) are overestimations, whereas slightly below half (45.22%) are roughly correct (i.e., deviating from GSC “impressions” by not more than 50%).

For the search engine marketing nerds amongst you, right here’s a extra granular view of how GSC knowledge compares to GKP:

Bart chart showing big search volume difference between GKP and GSC

Fairly a discrepancy, proper?

So why don’t we dig a little bit deeper and examine the precise causes of such a stark distinction in search volumes between GKP and GSC?

GKP teams key phrases with related which means (and makes errors)

In accordance with our GSC knowledge, the key phrase “ahrefs” acquired 25,436 impressions in June (within the U.S.):

GSC data on Ahrefs' total impressions

But when we have a look at the info from GKP for a similar month, it reveals a search quantity of 33,100:

GKP data on Ahrefs' total search volume

Which means the “GKP/GSC” ratio for this key phrase is 1.3x. Not too unhealthy, however not very correct both.

So what’s inflicting this discrepancy?

Apparently, the GKP search quantity for the key phrase “ahrefs” consists of the search volumes of all its misspellings that we are able to see in our GSC:

  • ahref (2,826 impressions)
  • hrefs (906 impressions)
  • aherfs (435 impressions)
  • arefs (267 impressions)
  • a hrefs (224 impressions)
  • aherf (185 impressions)
  • ahrfs (100 impressions)
  • and so on

We all know this as a result of GKP teams them collectively (and reveals the identical search quantity that it reveals for “ahrefs”):

List of misspellings of "Ahrefs" grouped together

However when a key phrase’s search quantity accounts for its misspellings, it’s not that huge of a deal, proper? Actually, it may possibly really be fairly helpful.

Effectively, there are some circumstances when GKP is grouping issues that shouldn’t be grouped. And this may be deceptive for us SEOs.

For instance, the key phrase “chusky” has a search quantity of 550k within the U.S. GKP thinks that it’s a misspelling of “husky” as a result of these two key phrases are being grouped collectively:

"Chusky" and "husky" grouped together

However should you have a look at the search outcomes for the key phrase “chusky,” you’ll immediately see that it’s not a misspelling. Moderately, it’s a novel canine breed, which means that it ought to have a definite search quantity of its personal.

Pictures of chusky dogs

Similar story with these 4 key phrases: “crimson room,” “crimson rose,” “crimson rock,” and “crimson robin”:

"Red room,” “red rose,” “red rock,” and “red robin” grouped together

GKP treats them as one, however you don’t even need to examine the search outcomes to know that these items should not the similar.

Just a few extra examples:

  • american banks & financial institution of america
  • mosquito bites & mosquito bits
  • guide a driver & drive guide

In all honesty, these sorts of “false groupings” should not widespread, however they could trigger you a number of complications must you stumble throughout certainly one of them.

What’s much more widespread (and worsening) is that GKP doesn’t present distinct search volumes for intently associated search question variations.

For instance, the next search queries are grouped collectively in GKP with no option to see particular person search volumes:

  • computer video games free obtain
  • free computer video games obtain
  • free video games obtain for computer
  • obtain free video games for computer
  • free computer sport downloads
  • obtain computer video games free
  • free video games to obtain for computer
Variations of "free pc games downloads" grouped together

This “grouping” situation is then being picked up by each search engine marketing device that pulls its search quantity knowledge from GKP (and practically all of them do that).

However right here at Ahrefs, we combine key phrase knowledge from a number of sources (together with a few years of historic clickstream knowledge). This permits us to “un-group” search queries and present the distinct search quantity for every variation:

Table where Ahrefs provides distinct search volumes for each query unlike SEMrush

Understanding the distinct search quantity of every particular person search question prevents you from unintentionally overestimating a subject’s complete search site visitors potential when summing the search volumes of all key phrases in a group.

Aside from that, realizing the preferred methods of how individuals phrase their search queries may help you modify the language of your web page accordingly and provide you with a extra eye-catching web page title.

As you may inform, this “grouping” characteristic in GKP could be irritating for us SEOs. However it’s not like we are able to blame GKP for hiding exact search volumes from us. GKP is a device for advertisers, not SEOs. And this grouping of comparable key phrases is definitely handy for them.

GSC reveals native impressions for search queries with native intent

In accordance with GKP, the key phrase “golf programs” has a powerful common month-to-month search quantity of 1 million within the U.S.:

Data showing keyword "golf course" has average monthly search volume of 1 million

However right here’s the factor. Relying on the situation of the place you’re looking from, you’ll see totally different pages rating for this key phrase:

  • Should you search from Rochester, you’ll see a web page from at #2.
  • Should you search from Bakersfield, you’ll see a web page from at #1.
Top 5 pages in Rochester and Bakersfield, respectively

Thus, the homeowners of those two web sites will see a distinct variety of month-to-month impressions for the key phrase “golf programs” of their GSC. That’s as a result of every web site ranks nicely for this key phrase solely in a particular location.

And solely the proprietor of an enormous web site like (which appears to have pages rating for “golf programs” in each conceivable location) would probably see the variety of impressions that’s near the 1 million that GKP reveals us.

These “regional” key phrases very often have the largest discrepancy (4x+) between GKP and GSC numbers, which could be seen in our graph above.

Impressions” in GSC are typically inflated by bot site visitors

Let’s speak about these uncommon circumstances the place GSC reveals the next search quantity than GKP.

We imagine that it probably occurs due to the bot site visitors. In accordance with John Mueller, not all the impressions from bots are filtered in GSC:

However what is “bot site visitors?”

Effectively, that’s any type of script or software program program that does automated searches in Google.

The “bots” that I’m positive you’re aware of are rank trackers that make automated searches in Google to report the place your web site ranks.

A a lot nastier instance is bots that generate faux clicks on Google adverts to place some strain on their rivals.

Anyhow, based on our research, GSC knowledge appears artificially inflated in solely 0.5% of circumstances. So it’s unlikely that you’ll endure a lot from bots polluting your GSC studies.

How does Ahrefs’ search quantity knowledge stack up?

I’m positive a few of you might be questioning how Ahrefs’ search quantity knowledge compares.

Effectively, let’s plot “Ahrefs/GSC” ratios proper subsequent to “GKP/GSC” ratios from the earlier graph:

Bar chart showing Ahrefs is more accurate than GKP

It seems to be like Ahrefs reveals “roughly correct” values in 60% of circumstances vs. 45% of circumstances for GKP. 

That’s principally because of our skill to “un-group” clusters of comparable key phrases and report distinct search volumes for every of them.

So should you have been questioning why the search volumes in Ahrefs should not the identical as these in GKP, now you already know that’s by design.

Closing ideas

I hope you loved this analysis research and that it gave you a greater understanding of how the numbers in GSC and GKP differ and, extra importantly, why they differ.

Have questions? Ping me on Twitter.

And by the best way, enormous thanks to our superior knowledge science crew for carving out a while of their busy schedules to assist me with this analysis.

(Visited 8 times, 1 visits today)

About us

SEO Agency with 20 years of experience. That's right, we have Reference and Education site colleagues on the team here who have been working with SEO since 2002. Our Agency has already helped thousands of people on the internet with SEO, Linking Building and much more. You know how difficult it is to get organic traffic to your website and how valuable it is. So, save your energy and let Ana SEO Agency do this hard work. We have all the experience you need to help you improve your ranking and other factors on your site.