SEO ranking: meaning and logic behind Google rankings
94 out of 100. On average, this is the percentage of users who stop at the first page of Google without ever going further, despite dozens and dozens of other results. Yet, if those URLs are there, it means that they are somehow considered relevant, pertinent, and useful for that search. So how do you get a better position? And who decides to show one site rather than another? The selection is not arbitrary: each step of the SERP is the result of an organized system that analyzes billions of pieces of content and arranges them according to automated criteria. This is SEO ranking, the automated process by which a search engine determines the order of display of organic results in response to a query. It does not involve paid promotions, nor does it depend on who manages the site: it follows its own rules, based on signals, correlations, and constantly evolving algorithms. Browsing Google always means, even without realizing it, going through a ranking system, and understanding how ranking works is the starting point for anyone who writes, designs, publishes, sells, and communicates online—and wants to transform their content into assets that are visible, consulted, and visited by those who search for something on Google every day.
What is SEO ranking?
SEO ranking is the process by which search engines determine the order in which web pages are displayed in the list of organic results for a given query. It is the way in which each result gains visibility over others, according to a precise and dynamic sequence that reflects the algorithm’s interpretation of relevance and usefulness. On Google Search, this system analyzes and compares billions of pieces of content for each search, ranking the available answers based on hundreds of parameters.
To put it another way: behind every answer that the search engine returns to users—whether instructions, reviews, or products to buy—there is an automatic classification system that evaluates billions of pages, measures their relevance to queries, and calculates signals of credibility, experience, and practical usefulness.
This is not a random process, nor can it be modified manually: the order visible in the SERP is a direct consequence of the algorithmic evaluation of each individual page, calculated in real time.
Being positioned in a search engine therefore means first being indexed (i.e., included in the index) and then evaluated according to criteria that define how relevant, reliable, and effective that resource is in responding to the user’s intent compared to the available alternatives. This concept applies to all pages in SERPs: from the first to the hundredth, each has a position for every possible combination of search, language, device, and location.
The term “SEO ranking” refers exclusively to visibility obtained in non-sponsored results, unlike paid ads managed through advertising platforms (such as Google Ads), which appear in different sections of the page and respond to completely different logic.
Ranking comes into play every time a result is displayed, influencing user behavior and the distribution of attention across the various links proposed. Understanding how it works allows you to correctly interpret the presence (or absence) of a website in a certain position and to make more informed decisions about the actions needed to make it visible in a stable manner that is consistent with its informational or commercial purposes.
Technical definition and how it works in search engines
In SEO, ranking is the final result of the selection and ordering of content performed by the search engine in response to a query. After crawling and indexing, pages undergo automatic classification based on semantic relevance, perceived content quality, and various technical, editorial, and contextual signals. In Google, this phase is managed through a set of software systems that process queries and documents to determine which pages to show, in what order, and in what form.
Each search triggers an instant comparison between the content in the index, and the results are organized to provide the most relevant answers at that precise moment. This sorting, which can vary significantly depending on the type of query, the assumed intent, the device used, the geographical location, and the user’s history, takes place in the fraction of a second it takes to return the SERP.
Ranking, classification, and other equivalent terms
In Google’s official documentation, the word “ranking” is frequently used to identify the process of assigning an order to the content to be displayed in organic results.
From a semantic point of view, “ranking” refers to the output of an evaluation: the relative “score” that allows elements to be ordered according to a pre-established criterion. The word implies a competitive “comparison” between alternatives, a concept consistent with the logic of SERPs, where each page is evaluated in relation to the others. “Positioning,” on the other hand, tends to describe the result for a single site or page, i.e., the point at which it is placed in the proposed ranking. ‘Classification’ is the term closest to the language of algorithms and statistical models: it refers to categorization and the assignment of meanings, and is part of the process that precedes and accompanies the ranking itself.
Although they have different nuances, all three terms contribute to describing the logical steps that lead to the arrangement of content in response to a search: content is classified, evaluated, and finally positioned. The entire ranking system is therefore a complex sequence of operations, which is constantly updated and determines who appears in front of users and in what order.
Difference between indexing and positioning
It is impossible not to mention the (fundamental) semantic and logical difference between indexing and ranking.
Indexing is when a page is acquired by a search engine and stored in its index: there is an initial quality assessment (yes/no), but it is primarily an archiving operation, necessary to make the resource accessible in the results. This means that a page has been analyzed, understood, and added to the search engine’s vast database. However, not all pages scanned by crawlers, such as Googlebot, are automatically indexed, and not all indexed pages remain there over time.
Ranking comes later: this is the stage at which a page is compared with others, evaluated on the basis of over 200 factors, and assigned a specific position in the SERP, which may vary depending on the query, device, geographical context, and time. A page may be indexed but not ranked for certain keywords because it is not considered competitive or relevant. Inclusion in the index is therefore a necessary condition for appearing, but not sufficient for achieving significant organic visibility. Understanding this distinction helps to correctly diagnose the reasons for the absence of traffic or poor performance, avoiding recurring misunderstandings.
Organic and paid positioning: two different paths
The results you see in SERPs can follow different logics: some occupy the top positions because they are promoted through paid SEA ads, while others are there by virtue of organic ranking, obtained algorithmically. The first method is managed through advertising platforms — primarily Google Ads — which allow advertisers to appear on selected keywords by paying a cost per click. In this case, influencing the position is a matter of budget, active competitors, and the relevance of the ad.
Positioning achieved through SEO activities, on the other hand, is developed through optimizing the quality and structure of the site, producing relevant content, improving technical performance, and building consistent external signals. The visibility achieved in this way does not involve a direct payment per click and tends to produce more stable and lasting results. However, it is neither immediate nor guaranteed: it requires constant work to respond to algorithm updates and maintain competitiveness with other pages aiming for the same visibility.
Why is it important to rank on Google?
Every search carried out online triggers an invisible competitive mechanism: dozens, hundreds or thousands of available pages are compared to determine the order in which they will be displayed. In this context, the position of your content is never neutral, but a variable that affects the type of audience you can reach, the effectiveness of the information you provide and your economic impact in the medium term.
Positioning yourself on the first pages of the SERP does not only mean getting more exposure, but actively participating in the flow of attention that occurs on Google every second: limited, selective, and oriented towards perceived relevance.
Appearing in the top organic results generates most of the traffic available for a given query. This controlled flow of access—based on explicit search intentions—produces measurable benefits on multiple levels: it makes content accessible at the right time, increases the likelihood of conversion, and reinforces the perception of a brand’s authority, especially when ranking is achieved on navigational or transactional keywords.
Over time, a site’s reliability in the eyes of users has often been reinforced by its constant presence in the most visible positions: people tend to trust what Google seems to “prefer,” generating a sort of reputational effect indirectly linked to ranking. In this way, organic positioning acts on several fronts simultaneously: visibility, trust, performance, and return.
Visibility, traffic, and targeting by query
The immediate value of ranking is linked to the distribution of attention on the results page: those who appear in the top spots are much more likely to intercept qualified clicks than those who occupy lower positions or, worse, subsequent pages. This effect is not only quantitative: through ranking, Google selects the pages it considers most relevant to the user’s intent for each search. As a result, the traffic that comes from it is often more segmented, motivated, and in line with the content offered by the page.
Ranking for informational queries allows you to capture interest early in the decision-making process; being found on commercial or transactional keywords, on the other hand, means participating at the moment when the user is closest to taking action—signing up, purchasing, or making an inquiry. The match between the query, the type of content ranked, and the user’s actual need is therefore a point of contact between ranking intelligence and marketing logic. From this perspective, visibility is an extension of relevance.
That’s why an old joke says that “the safest place to bury a dead body is on the second page of Google”: there is a huge difference between being at the top of a SERP and appearing on other pages, because the organic CTR of the entire first page collects 94% of total traffic on Google, with the second page barely reaching 4% and all the others scraping together only the remaining 2%.
These figures explain and justify the competition that exists in the climb to the top of the SERPs, because the visibility and performance of a website depend heavily on its ability to reach the top positions in Google’s results. They also explain the importance of optimizing a website to try to make it perform better, making corrections and on-page or off-page improvements to increase its ranking.
How user behavior is changing
There is another element to consider, namely how ranking influences the way users read.
The behavioral patterns observed in SERPs confirm what is easily intuited: users’ attention is focused on the first visible results, with a strong tendency to click on the top results on the page, especially if they are enriched with visual or concise elements. Google’s layout itself promotes an organization with decreasing visibility: after the first two or three slots, the probability of interaction drops dramatically, and the second page is only consulted in a marginal percentage of cases.
The presence of features such as featured snippets, AI Overview, or visual components (videos, images, local listings) further influences perceived ranking, regardless of formal ranking. A page that is technically “first” could be visually much lower if preceded by dynamic objects with a strong impact. In short, there is not only a “vertical” effect, and the order of results is not just a passive condition, but an element that directly affects the possibility of being consulted. It is the combination of SERP Features — snippet boxes, AI boxes, video carousels, local results — that changes the very composition of the page, shifting the area of visual interaction and also influencing who formally occupies the top slots.
In this context, claiming to be “first on Google” no longer equates to obtaining strategic clicks: it is the combination of organic ranking, result format, initial query, and page structure that determines actual performance.
The effect on business: from traffic to results
The organic visibility obtained through Google ranking translates into tangible metrics: the traffic generated by targeted searches has a concrete impact on the generation of qualified leads, the ability to sell products or services, and the consolidation of the brand over time. Being able to position yourself consistently on queries related to your industry means intercepting demand at moments of high intent, building not only immediate performance but also reputation.
In B2B contexts, appearing on the first pages for specific searches becomes a channel for ongoing leads; in B2C and eCommerce, ranking clearly influences traffic to product pages or landing pages that are useful for conversion. Even in non-commercial sectors — news, information, publishing — the same mechanism regulates the number of visits and, therefore, the monetization models available.
Without access to the top SERP results, even quality content risks remaining invisible, losing its potential impact. For this reason, the battle for positioning is not an end in itself, but the link between searches, content, and results.
How Google ranking works
When a user performs a search on Google, the system returns an ordered list of links in a matter of seconds: (usually) ten main results per page, accompanied by news boxes, images, or direct answers. This sequence is neither fixed nor stable, but is produced each time by an automated process that reprocesses the index data in real time and determines which pages to show, in what order, and in what format.
Every time a query is typed into the search field, Google activates a series of interconnected systems that draw on a vast archive of already indexed content. For each potentially relevant document, the algorithm calculates a score based on hundreds of parameters, including textual factors, technical signals, inbound links, past user behavior, predictive models, and behavioral metrics. This calculation determines a temporary ranking of the best content to display in response to the query.
The processing involves several stages, from linguistic analysis to assessment of relevance to the search intent, to implicit measurement of perceived “quality.” The results are then filtered by systems that reduce redundancy, penalize unreliable content, favor variety of sources or formats, and, in some cases, adapt the output based on external signals such as the user’s location or the device used.
Ranking, therefore, is not simply an ordered list: it is the embodiment of a multi-level evaluation that is constantly updated and reacts to changes in both content and user interests. For the same page, the position in SERP can often vary, even during the same day, precisely because algorithms are designed to adapt the output to collective behavior and the implicit expectations in the language of searches.
Algorithms and ranking systems in action
Delving deeper into what we know about this mechanism—which is also referred to as a “black box” because, after all, it is what makes Google “the” search engine!—the process that leads to the generation of a SERP is based on a complex network of algorithmic systems and evaluation modules designed to analyze user intent in real time and assign a score to each potentially relevant page. At the heart of this architecture are a number of key components, which have emerged from official guidance pages, confidential technical documents, and testimony obtained during public proceedings. Looking at these elements with the right perspective helps to better understand the complexity of how rankings are determined and the dynamic nature of the signals used.
- Ascorer is the system that assigns an initial score (IR score) to relevant documents based on their textual signals and the presence of terms consistent with the search query.
- SuperRoot is the component that refines this initial ranking, correcting scores, eliminating duplicates, and assigning penalties or rewards based on cross-cutting criteria.
- Twiddlers are specialized filters that modify (positively or negatively) the positions of documents in the ranking, taking into account attributes such as freshness, semantic diversity, and source balance.
- NavBoost is an evolutionary system that analyzes people’s actual behavior in relation to the results displayed: if a result receives recurring clicks in similar searches, it may climb positions over time.
- RankBrain (now incorporated into DeepRank and subsequently into RankEmbedBERT) is the machine learning system that helps Google interpret ambiguous or previously unseen queries by deducing meaning from semantic contexts and search patterns.
All these components work together in sequence, including analysis of the previous search session and user interactions. The result is a ranking that reflects both the theoretical relevance of a piece of content and its observed effectiveness in practice.
Interaction between queries and content
Google responds to a query—not to an abstract keyword. A query is a real input, formulated by a person, at a specific time and in a specific context: it can be simple (“pasta cacio e pepe”) or complex (“how to improve WordPress site ranking on Google in 2025”). The algorithm interprets this sequence of words to deduce what type of content can respond usefully to the perceived intent.
Unlike keywords, which represent semantic categories that content creators or SEO tools work with, queries are often unpredictable, colloquial, and dynamic. Google analyzes these formulations through its NLP (Natural Language Processing) component, seeking to understand the logical relationship between words, concepts, and the latent information need.
The relevance between content and query is no longer based on literal matching, but on more sophisticated criteria: Google checks whether the page offers a valid answer to the expressed intent (informational, transactional, navigational, exploratory), whether it is semantically close to the emerging meanings, and whether it has historically shown good signs of user satisfaction.
Even for identical queries, the content displayed can vary significantly depending on the user’s location, device, browser language, or preferred formats (articles, videos, product sheets, etc.). The search engine’s ability to interpret the context — and not just the words — is what makes ranking fluid, but also less predictable.
Quality signals according to Google
To decide whether a page is suitable for appearing in the top positions, Google looks at a multitude of signals that go beyond the content itself. Some are technical (such as loading speed or mobile display), others are editorial (completeness, clarity), and still others are based on collective user behavior (clicks, dwell time, return visits, etc.).
In recent years, Google has made explicit a new conceptual metric called “helpful content.” According to the official guidelines, the content that is rewarded is that which demonstrates direct experience in the subject matter (Experience), in-depth knowledge (Expertise), credibility of the source (Authoritativeness), and trust (Trust). These four criteria, referred to by the acronym E-E-A-T, are not individual factors but qualitative dimensions evaluated for each document.
Among the most frequently cited signals are links from other authoritative sites (which reinforce the concept of reliability) and continuous and updated presence in SERPs (which signals freshness and adaptability).
Google integrates this data with implicit feedback: if users systematically ignore a result or abandon it immediately after clicking on it, the system may consider it less useful. Conversely, repeated positive interactions can lead to improvements in ranking. In the current model, quality is a combination of what the content offers and how it is recognized inside and outside the search engine.
The main factors and variables that influence website ranking
Google has never released an exhaustive list of the factors that determine the position of results, but over the years it has provided various official references and updates that allow us to identify the areas on which the evaluation focuses. These are supplemented by observations consolidated from tests, patent analyses, SERP experiments, and direct statements from company spokespersons—and, since May 2024, information gleaned from the sensational Google leak, which brought to light various insights into the behavior of Big G’s algorithms.
To date, ranking models certainly incorporate more distributed information than in the past, and it is no longer sufficient to act on a single aspect of the page to gain visibility. Digital documents are evaluated holistically, in relation to both the query received and the behavior observed over time. The semantic architecture of the text, mobile readability, domain authority, inbound link network, update frequency, brand reputation, and consistency with search intent have become interconnected elements.
On-page optimization: content, tags, and structure
The first area where Google applies its evaluation criteria is the content of the page and how it is structured in the code. Each text document is scanned to identify the main topic, subtopics, key phrases, linguistic tone, syntactic variety, and signs of completeness. The relevance to a specific query is compared with that of other results, not only based on the words present, but also on their organization.
On-page optimization also includes the careful writing of descriptive tags (title, meta description), consistency between these and the visible titles, the choice of informative and clear URLs, and the presence of syntactic signals that facilitate semantic analysis (subtitles, lists, tables, breadcrumbs, structured data). The balance between depth, clarity, and visual configuration has a direct impact on the consideration that content will receive in the ranking process.
Hierarchical structure and meta tags
A page that is well-formed according to semantically structured logic provides the search engine with clear indications of which sections deal with specific topics and what the main focus is. The correct use of title hierarchy (H1 as the unique primary heading and H2-H6 for subheadings) allows you to segment the text and improve algorithmic readability. This principle facilitates both automatic parsing and the user experience, generating positive signals such as time spent on the page and complete page scrolling.
Alongside the visible structure are meta tags, pieces of HTML code that provide summary information to crawlers. The title is still one of the most important elements for ranking: its effectiveness depends on how well it summarizes the content and encourages clicks. The meta description, while not a direct ranking factor, affects the observed CTR and is usually used by Google as a snippet in results.
The URL itself is a semantic indicator. Clear page names that incorporate meaningful words consistent with the content help strengthen thematic alignment and also improve natural anchor text in external links.
Quality, intent, and depth of content
Google has refined the way it evaluates the quality of content over time. The amount of text is no longer a sufficient parameter: what matters is the ability to respond to the need expressed in the query, with an adequate level of depth, a solid information structure, and a point of view consistent with the author’s experience.
The most effective content is that which anticipates the user’s implicit questions, explores relevant aspects of the topic, and guides the reader by providing verifiable answers. Writing a text through the E-E-A-T lens helps to meet the implicit quality criteria in the ranking. A page that demonstrates specific expertise, cites reliable sources, and is signed by recognizable authors or linked to external sources tends to generate favorable signals from users as well: complete reads, shares, spontaneous links, and mentions.
Depth is not measured by the number of words, but by semantic density, coverage of the topic, and contextual readability in relation to target queries. This is one of the reasons why even short content—if well structured and focused—can achieve stable and lasting rankings.
Technical SEO and site performance
A page’s ability to rank depends not only on what it communicates, but also on how it is delivered. Technical SEO encompasses all aspects related to structure, response speed, website accessibility configuration, hierarchical organization of pages within the domain, and mobile compatibility.
Technical signals are not incidental: they directly impact ranking, especially since Google has permanently integrated Core Web Vitals parameters into its evaluation models. Rendering time, visual stability, and resource loading speed are elements that are tracked and compared on quantitative scales. Slow, disorganized, or poorly accessible mobile sites suffer explicit or implicit penalties in the SERP hierarchy.
Security (HTTPS), clean code, correct use of the canonical attribute, the presence of a well-formed sitemap, and the strategic use of structured data are also factors that help the algorithm interpret and classify information correctly. When a website facilitates the work of crawlers and maximizes the user experience, it creates favorable conditions for better ranking.
Links and external signals
Links from other pages remain one of the most important signals in estimating the authority and relevance of a document. It is now well established that it is not just the quantity of links received that matters, but their quality, thematic relevance, freshness, position in the text, and the nature of the source domain. A backlink from a trusted and editorially related source has a much greater impact than generic or artificially acquired links.
Google continues to calculate signals related to the perceived “popularity” of content by evaluating the semantic network surrounding it: unlinked mentions, brand citations, authoritative embeds, and relationships with content that has already been rewarded in the same niche. Internal links also play a strategic role because they guide the distribution of value among the pages of the site and indicate which content is considered central to the overall structure.
The consolidation of a pattern of “healthy,” consistent, and non-manipulative links continues to be one of the most solid investments in the medium term for improving ranking conditions, especially on highly competitive queries.
User behavior and implicit signals
There are also other more controversial and uncertain signals that Google may evaluate—never officially confirmed and often denied, even if the aforementioned leak has brought some “skeletons in the closet” to light. These are factors that are not generated on the page, but emerge from user interactions with the SERP itself throughout the search journey. Behaviors such as click-through rate by position, average time spent on the page, pogo sticking between results, number of scrolls, or lack of interaction are observed—in aggregate form—through systems such as NavBoost.
According to those who believe in these theories, Google does not “punish” a page that has a high bounce rate, but evaluates the performance of results according to predictive logic: if a page, despite being semantically relevant, does not meet user expectations or is systematically ignored, it may be overtaken by documents deemed more effective. Conversely, if content receives more clicks than expected for a certain position, or generates implicit satisfaction signals (long clicks, end of reading, sharing, direct return), the system may reward it even in the absence of structural updates.
The algorithm does not measure user experience directly, but learns over time which results best meet real needs. The entire ranking mechanism is now influenced by these continuous observations, which make SERP position a dynamic, responsive data point linked to a document’s actual ability to be useful in the specific context of the search.
How to monitor and measure website ranking
Observing ranking behavior from the perspective of a website manager means analyzing not only where certain content appears in SERPs, but also why it is in that position and how often it is actually viewed. Ranking position is not a fixed or absolute figure, as should be clear, but represents the dynamic and “momentary” outcome of an algorithmic comparison modulated on dozens of variables, including the query, the device used, the user’s history, and the linguistic or geographical context.
Identifying the “positioning” of a page therefore means reconstructing the average of its actual positions on specific queries, at different times and under different conditions. The value 1, for example, indicates that a URL is displayed as the first result among the organic results. However, depending on the nature of the query and the composition of the SERP, that result may also be found much lower down — for example, after maps, information boxes, or multimedia snippets — making that seemingly excellent number less effective in terms of actual visibility.
In this scenario, tools such as Google Search Console, manual SERP analysis, and advanced SEO monitoring platforms allow you to interpret the performance of content not only in terms of “raw ranking,” but as part of a competitive ecosystem that can be observed over time. Monitoring positioning thus becomes a strategic data reading activity, useful for understanding the behavior of the algorithm and the perception of the site within the SERPs activated by each search intent.
Viewing your position on Google
The position occupied by a page in search results can be detected in several ways, each with its own characteristics and limitations. In browsers, a first form of empirical observation is to directly verify the result by performing a manual search in incognito mode. This method allows you to reduce the influence of history, but does not eliminate all variables: geolocation, minimal customizations, engine-side A/B testing, and temporary fluctuations still modify the composition of the instant SERP.
Google Search Console, on the other hand, allows you to view the average organic position of each URL in relation to the queries for which it was displayed. The “position” indicated is a weighted average: if a page appears in first position for 50 impressions and in tenth position for another 50, the figure shown will be 5.5. This value does not correspond to a fixed position, but to a theoretical visibility index, which must be related to the number of impressions and the search volume for each query.
For analytical monitoring—but not based on official data such as GSC—there are also SEO tools, including, of course, our SEOZoom. With this platform, you can analyze in detail the organic positioning of any website or web page, collecting real-time data on the actual ranking for all keywords that appear in Google. For each combination of domain and query, you can read, for example, up-to-date information on SERP position, estimated search volume, seasonality, degree of competition, historical trends, SERP structure, and main active competitors, but you can also view the content of the ranked page, measure its level of optimization in relation to user intent, and identify any unattended information opportunities.
This data provides an objective basis for understanding ranking changes, identifying keywords that generate real traffic, and gathering useful signals for evaluating organic visibility over time. Extended SERP analysis also allows you to interpret algorithm behavior and anticipate competitive trends in results, giving you a clear and detailed operational picture.
Related metrics, CTR, and KPIs
In addition to pure positioning, organic visibility in SERPs can be measured through a combination of aggregate indicators. Impressions represent the number of times a piece of content has been viewed in search results for a given query. Clicks indicate how many times the user has selected that content. The ratio between these two values generates the CTR, expressed as a percentage.
Organic CTR is one of the most significant metrics for interpreting the actual performance of a ranking: a top position that generates a lower CTR than the expected average (around 28-30% for position 1, according to studies) may indicate a poor appeal of the snippet, poor relevance to the query, or the presence of SERP elements that “push down” the visible result.
When observed over time, these metrics can also signal significant events: sudden changes in CTR or impressions may coincide with algorithm updates, changes in user behavior, or layout changes on the results page. Through these signals, ranking also becomes an “indirect” indicator of alignment between the content offered and the implicit expectations of the search.
The use of SEO tools expands the information from “seeing where we are” to investigating the data collected by search engines in greater depth, interpreting clues that suggest trends, anomalies, and areas for optimization in terms of information, strategy, and content. In this way, positioning is monitored as an observable phenomenon, reversible and influenceable only when interpreted in its complexity.
The evolution of SEO ranking over the years
The logic behind how Google orders results in SERPs has never been static: the ranking system has undergone radical evolutionary phases, transforming from a purely link-based model to a multidimensional system integrated with semantic signals, user behavior, and neural processes. Understanding these transformations is not a historical exercise, but key to understanding how the algorithm interprets the relevance of content today—and will interpret it tomorrow.
Each update to the system has required a readjustment of editorial strategies, a rethinking of technical assets, and a growing focus on the user experience. Over the years, working on search engine visibility has meant moving from a formal optimization logic to a more advanced editorial and technological approach based on perceived quality, credibility, and adherence to intent.
From PageRank to search intent
The first ranking model Google used to organize results was based on a relatively simple principle: the value of a page depends on how many links it receives and the value of the sites that link to it. PageRank, calculated according to an original algorithm attributed to Google’s founders, dominated the early stages of SEO, prompting publishers to focus on accumulating inbound links.
From 2011 onwards, this vision was corrected with updates aimed at reducing the effectiveness of manipulative practices: Panda downgraded duplicate content and sites with low-quality text, while Penguin targeted artificial link networks. These changes did not eliminate the value of links as such, but they narrowed their scope of validity, shifting the emphasis to authentic editorial contexts.
At the same time, Google began to modify its query interpretation models. The concept of “keyword matching” has gradually given way to the evaluation of “search intent”: when a person types a phrase, what is the goal they hope to achieve? Starting in 2015, with the introduction of RankBrain, a portion of the ranking has been entrusted to machine learning systems capable of deducing meaning from unusual or ambiguous formulations.
The impact of content and “core” updates
Starting in 2018, Google made its major algorithmic updates less focused on individual technical flaws and more oriented toward re-evaluating content quality in an aggregate manner. The so-called “core updates” introduced general changes in document evaluation, often without warning, leading to significant fluctuations even for authoritative sites.
Of particular importance was the introduction of the E-A-T framework (now extended to E-E-A-T) as a criterion for recognizing the authority, expertise, and trustworthiness of content. Subsequently, the launch of the Helpful Content system (2022, updated in 2023-2024) prompted Google to value pages designed to be truly useful to users, rather than those created solely for “ranking.” The algorithm began to penalize generic, mass-produced content that lacked added value or was designed to fill a semantic box without making a real thematic contribution.
With the spread of artificial intelligence in content generation, another variable has emerged: not so much whether the content is generated by AI, but whether it shows a readable form of authentic experience or intent. Google’s updated guidelines do not automatically exclude the use of automated tools, but require that the output exceed high quality thresholds, demonstrating an ability to better meet user needs than existing alternatives.
Ranking systems in use today
In the current context, SERP ranking is managed by a modular structure consisting of dozens of systems operating in sequence and in parallel—from “presumed” systems such as Ascorer, SuperRoot, Twiddlers, and NavBoost to official ones.
Query analysis is now entrusted to neural networks that understand composite intents, distinguish linguistic nuances, and adapt responses to the user’s context. RankEmbedBERT, an evolution of RankBrain, improves the semantic match between queries and content, even in the absence of literally matching words.
The “classic” ranking systems have been joined by the new AI Overviews: automatically generated summary responses that occupy increasingly central portions of the SERP. These modules do not replace organic rankings, but modify their visibility and geography, introducing new dynamics in the competition for user attention.
Today, positioning reflects a layered interpretation of quality: it is not just about the content published, but emerges from the way the document is perceived, linked, clicked, updated, and recognized over time. The evolution of systems has not changed this logic, but has made it more opaque, reactive, and adaptive. Those who produce and publish online must take into account not only the rules, but also the consequences observable in the results. The challenge is no longer knowing what Google rewards, but how it recognizes what is useful.
Common mistakes and misconceptions about ranking
A website’s ranking on Google is often perceived as a static goal, to be achieved once and for all through a set of standard operations. In reality, ranking is the result of continuous evaluations, dynamic comparisons, and frequent reinterpretations of emerging signals. Precisely because of this fluid nature, some behaviors that have become established over time have lost their effectiveness, while others—although erroneous from the outset—continue to be adopted.
Many difficulties in climbing the organic results ladder stem from a distorted interpretation of how Google works. There is a tendency to assign excessive weight to individual factors perceived as “decisive” without considering their contextual function or aggregate effect. Other mistakes arise from the disconnect between expectations and measurable behaviors: visibility is confused with traffic volume, or it is believed that “appearing” is enough, neglecting the duration and relevance of the interaction.
Common mistakes made by beginners and professionals
One of the most common and counterproductive practices is the frantic search for keywords to replicate with high density in the text. Although Google’s criteria have evolved over the years towards semantic understanding, the idea that the frequency of a keyword automatically increases its ranking continues to generate repetitive, awkward content that is often of little real value.
Another mistake is the uncontrolled use of manipulative techniques (black hat), such as forced backlink exchange, automatic generation of indistinguishable content, and the use of unnaturally optimized anchor text. Even obsolete systems such as cloaking, doorway pages, or link profiles artificially constructed from poor domains expose you to penalties rather than results.
On the on-page front, there is still a tendency to favour secondary elements such as the exact alignment of the query in the title or first paragraph, neglecting more relevant factors such as consistency between sections, information completeness and the hierarchical architecture of the page. Ranking rewards truly useful content, and the algorithm is becoming increasingly effective at distinguishing between those who write for “the user” and those who write for “the effect.”
Unrealistic expectations and goals
Another deep-rooted misconception is that reaching the top position is the only acceptable goal—for any keyword. This aspiration, if not balanced by an analysis of the competitive context and the economic value of visibility, can lead to inefficient investments and a distorted view of SEO effectiveness.
The reality of ranking is selective and differentiated: for some searches, achieving third place can generate excellent results, while for others, first place is not enough to guarantee clicks. Search volume, the existence of SERP elements that override organic results (snippets, boxes, images), the type of device, and editorial saturation in the sector are all factors that reduce the absolute weight of positions.
The idea that a single activity—publishing an article, inserting a keyword, obtaining a link—can determine success in SERPs ignores the interdependence between elements and the cumulative nature of the signals observed. Positioning is not achieved with a single intervention, but is built on a consistent series of choices over time.
Outdated beliefs
Some concepts, once hotly debated, are no longer reflected in current ranking models. The bounce rate, for example, is no longer used as a direct metric for evaluating content quality because it does not reliably indicate whether the user found what they were looking for: they may leave the page because they quickly found the answer to their question, not because they were dissatisfied.
The idea that short URLs always perform better than longer ones reflects a technical misunderstanding: the structure of the URL affects crawling and readability, but does not in itself determine ranking. What matters is the consistency and stability of the information tree, rather than the number of words in the address.
Even the concept of “keywords in the domain” — once exploited to gain positions — has lost its effectiveness. Google itself clarifies that the presence of keywords in the domain name or brand does not directly influence the position in the results.
Finally, the practice of commenting on blogs with forced links for the purpose of accumulating backlinks has not only lost relevance, but can generate negative signals. Effective links come from editorial relationships, not automation. Continuing to act according to outdated logic exposes you to the risk of semantic isolation and penalizes the perceived credibility of the domain in the long term.
Statistics and numbers on SEO ranking
Beyond theories and best practices, the value of SERP ranking is quantifiable. Studies, benchmarks, and behavioral analyses by SEO platforms and technology companies have mapped out the precise effects generated by each position in organic results over time. These numbers highlight the real dynamics of attention, clicks, access, and conversion that derive directly from the order in which Google returns content.
The clickstream—i.e., the tracking of the pages actually clicked on by users after a search—provides essential information for understanding how crucial it is to appear in high positions. At the same time, comparing organic traffic and paid traffic allows us to estimate the economic value associated with the visibility obtained without ads.
These metrics are not only descriptive: they help define investment priorities, measure the growth margins expected from better positioning, and evaluate the opportunity cost of not appearing in the top positions for strategic keywords.
CTR and performance by position
The figures confirm how much SERP ranking affects the results that can be achieved. According to the latest average CTR data, updated to 2025, the first result receives an average of 39.8% of total clicks, a percentage that can exceed 42.9% if the page is accompanied by a featured snippet. With AI Overview, the CTR remains high at around 38.9%. The second position receives an average of 18.7%, while the third drops to 10.2%. From the fourth position onwards, interest declines progressively: 7.2% for the fourth, 5.1% for the fifth, down to 1.6% for the tenth.
These figures highlight the extremely competitive nature of the top of the SERP. Even small variations in position can make a big difference in terms of visibility and actual traffic. This is why organic positioning, although it has no direct costs, has a very real impact on the performance of content published online.
Economic impact of organic traffic
Organic traffic from good positioning doesn’t just generate visits—it generates value. According to data collected over the past few years, over 53% of the total traffic to an average website comes from organic search. In e-commerce contexts, this percentage often translates into significant shares of direct sales, with higher margins than paid channels.
In addition, unpaid traffic may also produce more conversions on average than traffic from sponsored ads, with longer engagement rates and higher average visit times. Other analysts also estimate that, for highly competitive transactional keywords, appearing in the top three organic results can represent annual savings equivalent to thousands of dollars in PPC investments — benefiting the company’s strategic autonomy.
Today, with the average cost per click rising and advertising slots becoming saturated in many niches, the ability to generate qualified traffic through organic ranking ensures a substantial competitive advantage. It’s not just about spending less, but about being present where your audience is looking, even when searches don’t trigger an immediate decision.
Frequently asked questions about SEO ranking
Search engine ranking is not a side effect of SEO, but the direct result of a ranking system that evaluates each page in real time in light of a query. Understanding how it works means recognizing that online visibility is the combined result of observable variables, implicit signals, and algorithmic rules that operate on a large scale and change over time. In short, it is a continuous evaluation process that involves every indexed page, for every possible query, and is reformulated every time Google receives a request.
Unlike SEO strategies — which aim to improve this result — ranking is a dynamic phenomenon that exists even in the absence of voluntary intervention: all published content is examined, sorted and — if deemed appropriate — displayed in SERPs for at least one search.
Many misunderstandings stem from a simplified view of ranking as a static formula or as a result that can be achieved through mechanical interventions, but legitimate doubts can also arise from those who practice SEO as beginners or produce content methodically.
The following questions therefore bring together the most common issues related to interpreting ranking as “search engine behavior” rather than site action. They are useful for clarifying what happens after indexing, for taking a closer look at ranking from the perspective of the content being ranked, and for correcting some of the most widespread—and often incorrect—ideas about organic visibility.
- What does “SEO ranking” mean from Google’s perspective?
SEO ranking is the result of an automatic classification performed by the algorithm, which assigns each page a position in the SERP in response to a specific query. It is not a universal judgment on the quality of the content, but a contextual selection based on hundreds of factors and continuously updated. It is part of the third phase of search engine operation, after scanning and indexing.
- What is the difference between ranking a single page and ranking an entire site?
Ranking is assigned to the individual page for each query. However, the overall reputation of the site — its internal structure, average content quality, external signals — influences the strength of each document. Good site ranking as a domain (in terms of perceived authority) can facilitate entry into SERPs even for new pages, but each URL is still evaluated independently based on its ability to respond to the search intent.
- What is the difference between indexing and ranking?
An indexed page is present in the Google database and can be displayed in the results. A ranked page, on the other hand, has actually appeared in the SERP for at least one query. Indexing is a necessary but not sufficient condition: much content is stored but not highlighted because it is not considered relevant or competitive enough.
- How can I find out exactly where my website ranks on Google?
There is no such thing as an “absolute position” for a page. Each piece of content can occupy a different position depending on the query, device, location, and time of the search. Monitoring tools—such as Google Search Console or SEO platforms such as SEOZoom—return the average position for a given query, based on the impressions received. For a single manual check, it is useful to use your browser in incognito mode, but even then, the result depends on numerous variables that are not always controllable.
- Why do I see my website in the top position, but others see it lower down (or not at all)?
SERPs are not the same for everyone. Google personalizes results based on factors such as geographic location, device, language, and, in some cases, browsing history. In addition, the order may change depending on how often the query is updated and micro-variations related to slightly different intents. Therefore, an apparent position is not equivalent to a universal position.
- How long does it take to improve SEO ranking?
SEO times vary greatly. A page can gain visibility in a matter of days if it intercepts a low-competition intent or a very specific query, while for highly competitive keywords, improvement can take weeks or months. The time depends on the quality of the content, the competitiveness of the topic, the signals received from outside, the consistency of the site architecture, and the responsiveness of the algorithm itself to aggregated signals.
- Is it more effective to work on specific keywords or generic ones?
It depends on your goals. Long tail keywords are less competitive, capture detailed searches, and are more likely to convert for transactional search intent. Generic keywords can offer higher volumes but also greater dispersion. From a strategic perspective, ranking for specific queries is often the first step in building authority and scaling up broader thematic clusters in a sustainable way.
- What can affect ranking even if I’m in the top position?
A SERP today can include elements that precede organic results: featured snippets, AI Overview boxes, video carousels, People Also Ask. Even if a page is technically in the “top position,” it may visually appear lower on the screen. This affects the actual percentage of clicks received, which is why CTR depends not only on position but also on the active layout.
- Can a page that is already ranked lose positions if it is not updated?
Yes: over time, an outdated page can be overtaken by more recent, specific, or better-performing content. For queries that favor freshness (such as topics related to technology, regulations, trends), the absence of updates can reduce perceived relevance. Even the slow decay of internal or external signals (inbound links, clicks, shares) can be accompanied by a gradual decline in rankings.
- Is there a limit to the number of keywords I can “rank”?
There is no technical limit set by Google. However, each page tends to gain visibility on a limited set of related queries for which it is an effective answer. The entire site, as a whole, can rank for many more keywords, provided that the content is distinct, relevant, and structured in a consistent manner. The volume of keywords that can be ranked is proportional to the quality, organization, and thematic coverage of the editorial project.
- If my site loses positions, is it always due to a Google update?
Not necessarily. Algorithmic updates can affect rankings, but external changes (new competitors, changes in SERPs, variations in user behavior) can also cause fluctuations. In addition, the wear and tear of outdated content or the loss of authority of the context in which it was placed can explain certain declines. Google updates become relevant when the change affects a lot of content on the same site or an entire industry.
- How should you react to a sudden drop in already ranked keywords?
Fluctuations are part of the normal behavior of a dynamic SERP. However, if the drop is sudden and prolonged, it may be useful to check for recent algorithmic updates, compare metrics on Search Console, check the status of relevant backlinks, and analyze any changes in content or page structure. Often, a repositioning can be reversed through targeted updates and improvements to the user experience.
- Do social media help search engine rankings?
Social media do not generate direct signals for organic ranking on Google, at least according to public guidelines. However, like many other things that “are not SEO but do SEO,” they can amplify the spread of content, increase engagement signals, and contribute to the generation of links and citations. In addition, visibility on social media can trigger branded searches and strengthen the semantic identity of a site or author on specific topics.
- Is SEO also necessary for images?
Yes, images contribute to the understanding of content and can also generate traffic through visual search. Image optimization with actions such as filling in alt text with relevant descriptions, using descriptive file names, and inserting images consistent with the text helps with ranking in both classic search and the Google Images section. In addition, the use of effective graphics or visuals can improve certain behavioral signals (scrolling, reading time).
- Does Google really consider time spent on a page to determine ranking?
Google does not use “dwell time” as an official direct metric, but—according to the leak and as already claimed by various analysts—it observes aggregate user behavior through systems such as NavBoost: expected clicks, return rate to SERP, implicit endorsement of content suitability. If a page is systematically ignored or quickly abandoned, it may lose visibility. If, on the other hand, it receives signs of “implicit satisfaction,” these signals can contribute to a progressively better ranking.
- What factors seem important but do not affect ranking?
Bounce rate, exact keyword density, and URL length do not directly influence ranking. Google has clarified that immediate SERP re-entry can only be problematic if it is systematic and aggregated, but is not interpreted as an individual “rejection” signal. Even the presence of the keyword in the domain name is no longer a determining factor for ranking.
- What is the relationship between Google ranking and visibility on Google Maps?
Local ranking follows a slightly different logic. Results on the map depend on Google Business Profile and factors such as distance, relevance, and the relevance of the business to the query. An algorithm is also used in this case, but the ranking unit is not the website page, but the business listing. SEO and local SEO share some principles, but they are triggered by different signals.
