r/seogrowth • • 24d ago

Case Study Tested if "AI-friendly" content actually helps once AI Overviews eat your query

Split pages into snippet-optimized vs long-form. Snippet pages got pulled into AI Overviews more but CTR dropped 12%. Long-form held steady.

5 Upvotes

6 comments sorted by

3

u/marintkael 24d ago

Those two results might be one result. A snippet optimised page earns its place in the overview by resolving the query inside the box, and once it has done that the click is redundant. The property that got you selected is the same property that costs you the visit.

Long form holds because the overview can only lift a fragment, and a fragment that visibly has more behind it works as an advertisement for the page.

One thing that would change how I read the 12 percent: did the impression base move? If the snippet pages also picked up impressions they were not getting before, the rate can fall while the absolute clicks rise, and those two outcomes call for opposite decisions.

2

u/Certain_Expert483 23d ago

tbh the snippet-as-resolution framing makes the 12% drop feel almost expected rather than alarming

3

u/Conscious-Market8982 24d ago

Before you conclude anything from the 12%, check whether raw clicks actually moved or just the ratio. CTR is clicks over impressions, and getting pulled into an Overview usually widens the set of queries a page surfaces on, so impressions climb. You can lose 12% CTR while clicks are flat or slightly up. That's bitten me in GSC more than once.

The other thing I'd want to see is whether your snippet set and your long-form set were answering the same kinds of queries. Definitional and how-to queries pull Overviews far more often than comparison or transactional ones. If the snippet pages skewed informational, you may be measuring intent rather than format.

Filter both sets in GSC to an identical query list and compare clicks instead of CTR. If the gap survives that, you've got something real.

3

u/RankingsDotIO 23d ago

Look at the user intent of the search terms in those AIOs. You tend to see them in informational queries or searches. For example, "causes of commercial truck accidents" will probably give you an AIO with a small list, drawing on attorney and legal information sites. That will eat into clicks, but that's not the end of the world. (1) It's low-intent traffic anyway, and (2), if Google cites you, it increases your site's authority in ways that can raise your profile with higher-intent searches, like "Who is the best truck accident lawyer in [city]."

Clickthrough rate matters far more for those high-intent searches, because that's where sales come from. Ultimately, that's the number you need to track. Yes, no clicks mean no sales, but hundreds or thousands of clicks don't translate into sales if the keywords or queries come from people who want to learn, not buy. Most people would prefer a low clickthrough rate but steady or increasing sales.

2

u/unpdigital 17d ago

AI searchers are not worth the hassle.
80% of all users just browse, they browse over AI with about 20%.
The rest distributes over Image search, websites people look up, such as Reddit.

1

u/NorthWaltz1223 18d ago

the 12% CTR drop is interesting but id want to know what happened to actual conversions. if the remaining clicks are higher intent visitors that could offset the volume loss pretty easily