| 6:46 pm on Dec 19, 2001 (gmt 0)|
There are a couple of differences between the Overture tool and WT that will cause the numbers to be different.
the first is the difference in the data that is collected. WT maintains a database of approx. 350 million searches collected from multiple sources over an 8 week period. That means it's not collecting every single search, but rather a sample of all the searches.
The Overture database collects all the searches conducted at Overture and its partners sites for the previous month. I've never seen any info published by Overture that tells the actual size of the database, so there isn't really away to compare them.
The other thing that will cause the Overture numbers to look quite a bit different is the fact that they combine plurals and mispellings into the count, whereas WT doesn't do this.
WT will list the different variations separately. WT also doesnot contain any search data generated by automated search tools or position checkers. In many cases, that type of software generated searches can dramtically scew the numbers.
|When comparing the count with the number of web pages for each keyphrase (i.e. to identify how competitve the phrase is) what is the most accurate search engine to compare with wordtracker? |
One isn't more accurate than another because the level of competition is different on each one. If you were only going to check one engine, then it would make sense to collect your competitive data from Google simply because it has the biggest market share, but those numbers won't give you any indication on which term is the least competitive on Alta Vista.
|is there a more accurate way of finding the best keyphrase than to divide the count for a phrase by the number of pages returned in a search? |
The other key factors you want to take into consideration are the overall range of competing pages, and the overall market share of the particuar engine in relation to the other engines you are checking.
With competing pages, you need to remember the fact that off-page factors will have a much greater impact on rankings for terms with high page counts.
The way I approach this is to assign a numerical value to specific ranges of pages that works as a competitive adjsutment.
0-10,000 = 1
10,001-20,000 = .9
20,001-30,000 = .8
30,001-40,000 = .7
40,001-50,000 = .6
50,001-60,000 = .5
50,001-70,000 = .4
70,001-80,000 = .3
80,001-90,000 = .2
90,001-100,000 = .1
100,000 + = 0
Using those numbers you can simply multiply the count (the popularity of the term) by the corresponding competitive adjustment score.
If you are going to compare terms across multiple engines, then you would need to apply a similar adjustment to each engine based on its market share. Going that will make the final score a better estimation of the terms total traffic potential.
| 7:53 pm on Dec 21, 2001 (gmt 0)|
Woa...wait a moment...I just tried using Wordtracker (Keyword Universe) and their results are exactly the same as GoTo's??
This is what they state:
"(These are actual queries from GoTo last month) "
What's this all about?
| 10:29 pm on Dec 21, 2001 (gmt 0)|
You've GOT to be kidding.. Wordtracker showing Overture database?
I don't like sound of this.....
| 11:25 pm on Dec 21, 2001 (gmt 0)|
You're just using the wrong setting. You've always been able to query GoTo directly from WT.
| 4:52 pm on Feb 14, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Mike Mindel from Wordtracker here. Just to clarify this last point.
Our database consists of all the keywords from the major metacrawlers Dogpile and Metacrawler for last 60 days. This comes to about 350 million searches, but it is ALL searches on these Metacrawlers. Which is a sample of the overall web searches.
However, we also allow users to use the Overture keyword tool through our system if they want. I.e. combined with the power of the lateral tool and the baskets, and competition analysis etc. Users can plug it into the system instead of our own database if they feel like it.
Hope that clears things up.
| 12:34 am on Mar 20, 2002 (gmt 0)|
One of the great things about using Wordtracker is that you can search across the spectrum of major search engines and directories, it helps you when you are looking to find niche phrases for one specific engine or to find the "across the board" search terms that will deliver you traffic from a variety of sources.
It's interesting to see how people combine search phrases using wordtracker and the PPC's. The phrases being bought on PPC are not the same as the niche phrases on Wordtracker, it seems that you get the early adopters in there and people just jump on the bandwagon, when there are some excellent phrases going cheaply that will deliver farmore traffic than some of the high exposure phrases.
| 1:10 pm on Jul 25, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Bit late to reply, but what would you lot recommend when building a site optimised for Google. Wordtracker or Overture.???
| 6:07 pm on Jul 25, 2002 (gmt 0)|
I'd recommend the Google AdWords tool. If you set up a short-term campaign, you can collect quite a bit ov valuable data.
| 6:56 pm on Jul 25, 2002 (gmt 0)|
You know it's quite interesting how "Mike" (WT) jumped into this discussion.
WMW seems to be expanding... exponentially and attracting key online players to comment.
| 10:44 am on Sep 26, 2002 (gmt 0)|
I have just joined these forums and found this thread as I was looking for info on the valisity of Overtures number of searches.
Things may have changed since this thread was started but wanted to warn newbies about Overtures figures.
I researched a term I thought might be profitable.
On Overture is said 43,000 searches last month.
On Wordtracker is said 83 searches last month.
Some difference hey?
Well, I built and optimised a page for Inktomi. Submitted and got to #1 at MSN.
In 72 hours so far I have had 2 hits on this term. Now, which do you believe, Wordtracker or Overture?
On a separate issue, does anyone know a way to query the UK overture by using a URL with keyword in it? You can do this on the US database by using:
You can query the UK database by going to :
But how do you add a search term to this uRL?
| 11:16 am on Sep 26, 2002 (gmt 0)|
that normally does it.
What I am discovering more and more is that both wordtracker and overture's results are totally wrong, either that or being number one for your keyword on a SERP doesn't mean you're going to get a the lions share of the clicks, but even then 2 visits in 72 hours for a keyword that supposedly has tens of thousands of people searching for it seems a bit rediculous.
| 11:39 am on Sep 26, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Many thanks - works a treat. I find that the UK stats are more representative as a whole and closer to Wordtrackers own. OK for doing quick checks before paying for wordtracker.
Incidently the same search term that got 43000 searches at US Overture got Zero at UK one. Not a US based term either. However, I would prefer to get a ZERO returned than a 43000 so I can not waste so much time in the future identifying bogus niches.
| 12:21 pm on Sep 26, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Remember that UK users normally default to MSN.co.uk, not MSN.com, because of the regional settings on their machines and I.P. addresses etc, therefore that could explain why you had no success with the keyword from inktomi (if the keyword is UK related). MSN.co.uk results tend to differ dramatically compared to the MSN.com results.
When I ran an overture.com campaign a few months back I noticed that on average, despite the amount of affiliaite sites overture work with, that it only accounted for 8% of all my traffic.
If the overture search suggestion tool shows a total of 43000 searches in any particular month for a keyword, then what I would do as a general rule is times this number by 12.5 to get an overall idea of what the total number of searches made for the term accross all search engines. It seems to work for me. Again, it will vary depending on the keyword.
| 12:37 pm on Sep 26, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Have you guys compared the results with the E-Spotting tool?
| 12:54 pm on Sep 26, 2002 (gmt 0)|
the term IS NOT UK BASED. For these particular keyword phrase I have listed Overtures US count of:
Note these are three 2 word phrases with mispellings of the correct word as the second word in each case.
These counts are not accurate by a long way and multiplying them by 12.5 would be rediculous in this instance.
I do not mean to offend you or anyone here, but MSN would certainly have more than 2 searches in 72 hours if these figures were right, and my page is #1 for all of them.
thanks for the link. Never heard of this one but will check it out.
| 1:14 pm on Sep 26, 2002 (gmt 0)|
I thought we were talking about a UK term, for which E-Spotting can be useful.
| 1:32 pm on Sep 26, 2002 (gmt 0)|
|"On Overture is said 43,000 searches last month. |
On Wordtracker is said 83 searches last month." - perfectG
Here is a link to another related thread titled wordtracker and overture disagree [webmasterworld.com].
Anyway I have some thoughts on your example but take them with a grain of salt since I don’t know really know what keyword we are talking about. I’m guessing that the 83 number is the Wordtracker’s “count” data which is the number of searches in the last 60 days on search engines that Wordtracker tracks. Currently, “count” happens to roughly correspond to the number of daily searches on all search engines combined. Also, I am guessing that the 43,000 Overture number is a victim of Overture combining search frequency data for variations on the keyword (i.e. keyword search frequency of plurals and other variations are mapped onto one keyword and the keyword they map to isn’t necessarily the most searched variation). The Overture data may also be a victim of automated rank checking programs.
|"Well, I built and optimised a page for Inktomi. Submitted and got to #1 at MSN. |
In 72 hours so far I have had 2 hits on this term. Now, which do you believe, Wordtracker or Overture?" – perfectG
Having abandoned hope for the 43,000 Overture number, I will see if a “count” of 83 in Wordtracker would have helped predict the results you see. If you view 83 as roughly the number of daily searches on all search engines combined and you take Wordtracker’s estimate that MSN is gets roughly 13% of all searches then you would expect there to be roughly 32 searches (83*3*0.13=32) on MSN for your keyword during the 72 hour (3 day) period. Since you received 2 of them it appears that your #1 listing, which is below sponsored matches and directory sites and above the other web pages, received 6% of the MSN searchers. There are so many approximations going on and a 72 hour time period is so short but at least it appears that the Wordtracker data can put you in the right ballpark of what to expect.
| 2:01 pm on Sep 26, 2002 (gmt 0)|
GMoney. You said:
Since you received 2 of them it appears that your #1 listing, which is below sponsored matches and directory sites and above the other web pages, received 6% of the MSN searchers.
Sorry I don't know how to reply with quotes to a previous thread.
This is incorrect. There were no sponsored pages or directory listing for these keywords. This is why I chose these keywords for my testing purposes. Sorry for not sharing the keywords but I prefer to keep my URL private. Therefore my page would have been the first result in all searches for this keyword combination.
When I have done this same "testing" with Wordtracker results (again using MSN/Inktomi), I have gotten the approximate traffic I would have expected from the figures Wordtracker predicted.
You are correct however that these keywords are victim of the pluralis & misplellings lumped together fiasco.
| 2:09 pm on Sep 26, 2002 (gmt 0)|
|Have you guys compared the results with the E-Spotting tool? |
Do you have any idea what to multiply the espotting results by to get a better idea of the total number of searches made for that particular term?
perfectG - is your site in Google yet and if so how many refferals do you get from there?
| 2:19 pm on Sep 26, 2002 (gmt 0)|
No, not in Google. It was only written this week and submitted to Inktomi. Will be interesting to see what happens though I doubt it will rank highly at Google. Possibly a little spammy.