What correlates with AI brand mentions? Ahrefs' 75,000-brand study
Ahrefs correlated 12 metrics with brand mentions in ChatGPT, AI Mode and AI Overviews: web mentions beat backlinks, and it warns of no causation.
32 articles · RSS
Method-first investigations with a stated hypothesis, sample and published limitations.
Ahrefs correlated 12 metrics with brand mentions in ChatGPT, AI Mode and AI Overviews: web mentions beat backlinks, and it warns of no causation.
Bing's own study of sitemaps found 18% of lastmod values set incorrectly, usually to the generation date, and Google says it only trusts accurate ones.
Ahrefs compared the age of 16.975 million URLs cited by AI assistants against organic Google results. Here is the method, the numbers and the limits.
SE Ranking tracked 100,000 keywords in 20 niches and measured Reddit's share of Google's top three results. This piece reviews its method and limits.
Sistrix analyzed 80 million keywords and found position 1 averages 28.5% CTR, ranging from 13.7% to 46.9% depending on the SERP layout.
A randomized Chrome-extension experiment hid AI Overviews for 1,065 searchers. This piece analyzes Agarwal and Sen's SSRN study of the CTR impact.
SearchPilot ran a real controlled SEO split test on author bylines and bios. Result: no detectable ranking gain, and possibly a small loss.
A SearchPilot split test added 301 redirects atop an existing canonical tag for trailing-slash duplicates. The result stayed inconclusive.
Botify's case study of a US auto marketplace ties internal-link depth to crawl activity: a 19x increase in crawling once linking was fixed.
Ahrefs found a 33.4% title rewrite rate, far below Zyppy's 61.6% and Search Engine Land's 76%. The gap traces to how each study defines a match.
We read the robots.txt of 60 publishers and SEO vendors. News sites block AI crawlers almost universally. The SEO industry does not.
Zyppy's 23-million-link study and Google's own crawling documentation show why pages with few internal links struggle to get discovered and clicked.
Google's own review-snippet documentation names exact required properties and exact abuse rules. Most markup fails one of those, not from being absent.
rel=next/prev has been dead as an indexing signal since 2019, per Google's own words. Infinite scroll without real URLs is the same mistake in new clothes.
Backlinko's 11.8M-result study and Ahrefs' 1M-keyword study both find a positive link between referring domains and rank, but the coefficient is weak.
Two widely repeated hreflang error statistics do not trace to any real source. Here is what could be verified instead, from Google's own documentation.
GPTZero, the Tow Center and a Cureus study each measured AI citation hallucination differently, and none of their numbers agree with each other.
Four 2026 papers measured what predicts citation by AI search engines. Position and relevance win; most citations skip brand domains entirely.
A common crawl-budget fix is backwards. Google's own documentation says noindex still costs a full request before the page gets dropped from the index.
Google's manual actions against parasite SEO are 18 months old. Here is what is documented versus what is anecdotal case tracking.
Court testimony and a leaked Google document, read together, describe a click-based re-ranking system Google spent years declining to confirm in public.
Google documents three required VideoObject properties, not the four often claimed, plus exact date and duration formats and a rich-result caveat.
CrUX data and a 20,000-URL ranking study both show a link between Core Web Vitals and rank, but Google's own docs put content relevance first.
A 2024 Vercel and MERJ study measured the real gap between crawl and render at scale. The median was seconds; the tail stretched to a full day.
SEO content repeats precise E-E-A-T ranking-weight percentages. We checked the two most-cited figures against their sources and Google's own documentation.
Ahrefs' December 2025 study puts the word count to AI Overview citation correlation at 0.04. Backlinko's 11.8M-result study finds no ranking edge either.
Google publishes a real, maintained list of the named systems behind Search ranking. Read directly, not summarized secondhand.
A specific local ranking percentage breakdown circulates widely. It doesn't match Whitespark's real 2026 chart, and Google names no percentages at all.
x-default has been explained by Google at least three times since 2013. Here is the real, dated wording each time, and what current documentation says.
Google called HTTPS a very lightweight ranking signal in 2014 and has never revised that number. Adoption data now shows why it barely needs to.
Featured snippet prevalence and CTR figures vary by nearly 2x across sources. Here is which trace to a real, dated study, and which don't trace anywhere.
Google's own Article structured data documentation names zero required properties, only recommended ones, which changes how schema work gets prioritized.