How to outline SERP intent and ‘source sort’ for better analysis


SERP analysis coupled with your key phrase research is a staple of any modern web optimization campaign.

Analyzing search intent is already a process inside this. But when it comes to SERP evaluation, all too often I see reports that cease at classifying a end result by its intent – and that’s it.

We know that for queries with multiple frequent interpretations, Google works to provide a diversified results web page with differentiations often being:

  • Result intent (commercial, informational).
  • Business sort (national end result, native result).
  • Aggregators and comparison websites.
  • Page type (static or blog).

And then when planning content material we’d develop a method primarily based on Google rating some informational pieces on Page 1, so we’ll create informational items too. 

We may use a software to “aggregate” metrics on the primary page and create artificial key phrase issue scores.

This is where this technique falls down, and in my opinion, will proceed to show diminishing returns sooner or later.

This is as a outcome of the overwhelming majority of these analysis items don’t acknowledge or take into account source sort. I personally consider that it is because the Search Quality Rater Guidelines which have led to E-A-T, YMYL, and web page quality turning into a major part of our day-to-day workings don’t really use the term source type, but it does talk about assessing and analyzing sources for issues like misinformation or bias.

When we start to look at source varieties, we also want to take a glance at and understand the ideas of quality thresholds and topical authority. 

I’ve talked about high quality thresholds, and how they relate to indexing in earlier articles I’ve written for Search Engine Land:

But once we relate this to SERP evaluation, we will perceive how and why Google is choosing the web sites and parts it is to form the outcomes web page and also achieve an concept of how viable it might be to effectively rank for sure queries.

Having a better understanding of ranking viability helps with forecasting potential visitors opportunities after which estimating leads/revenue based mostly on how your website converts.

Get the day by day newsletter search entrepreneurs rely on.

Defining source types

Defining supply varieties means going deeper than just classifying the ranking web site as informational or commercial, as Google also goes deeper.

This is as a result of Google compares websites based on their sort, and not simply the content being produced. This is particularly prevalent in search outcomes pages for queries that may have a blended intent and returns results of each industrial and informational intent.

If we have a glance at the question [rotating proxy manager] we will see this in follow in the high 5 outcomes:

#Result WebsiteIntent ClassificationSource Type Classification1OxylabsCommercialCommercial, Lead Generation2ZyteCommercialCommercial, Lead Generation3Geek FlareInformationalInformational, Commercial Neutral4Node Pleases MeInformationalOpen Source Code, Non-Commercial5Scraper APIInformationalInformational, Commercial Bias

Quality thresholds are decided by the website’s identification, basic area type (not simply the blog subdomain or subfolder) after which context.

When Google retrieves info to compile a search outcomes web page, it will compare websites being retrieved first based mostly on their supply kind group first. So within the instance SERP, Oxylabs and Zyte might be in contrast first against one another, earlier than the opposite supply types elected for inclusion or that rank highest based on weighting and annotation. 

The SERP is then shaped primarily based on these retrieved rankings and then overlaid with user knowledge, SERP features, and so on.

At face worth, by understanding the source sorts that Google is selecting to show (and where they rank) for particular queries we will know whether they are viable search phrases to target given your supply kind.

This can be common in SERPs for [x alternative] queries the place the enterprise might want to rank for competitor + alternative compounds.

For instance, if we look at the top 10 blue hyperlink outcomes for [pardot alternatives]:

#Result WebsiteIntent ClassificationSource Type Classification1G2InformationalInformational, Non-Commercial Bias2Trust RadiusInformationalInformational, Non-Commercial Bias3The AscentInformationalInformational, Non-Commercial Bias4Capterra (Blog)InformationalInformational, Non-Commercial Bias5JotformInformationalInformational, Non-Commercial Bias6Finances OnlineInformationalInformational, Non-Commercial Bias7GartnerInformationalInformational, Non-Commercial Bias8GetAppInformationalInformational, Non-Commercial Bias9DemodiaInformationalInformational, Non-Commercial Bias10Software SuggestInformationalInformational, Non-Commercial Bias

So in case you are Freshmarketer or ActiveCampaign, while the business might even see this as a relevant search time period to target, and it aligns with your product positioning, as a industrial source sort you’re unlikely to realize Page 1 traction.

This doesn’t mean to say that having the messaging, and comparison pages on your website are not important pieces of content for person education and conversion.

Different source sorts have different high quality thresholds

Another important distinction to make is that different supply varieties have completely different thresholds.

This is why third-party tools that produce keyword problem scores based on a metric such as backlinks for all results on Page 1 have issues, as not all supply sorts on the vast majority of SERPs are judged in the same method.

This signifies that to find a way to ascertain the “benchmark” for what it will take your web site and content to get into a traffic-driving position, you should compare against different web sites with the same source types, and then the type of content that they’re ranking with.

Topic clusters and frequency

Establishing good matter clusters and having easy-to-follow data bushes enable search engines to know your website source kind and “usefulness depth” with higher ease.

This can also be why, for my part, for numerous queries in the same area (e.g., tech), you’re likely to see web sites akin to G2 and Capterra incessantly for a broad range of queries. 

A search engine can have a greater stage of confidence in returning these websites in the SERPs, whatever the software/tech type, as these web sites have:

  • High publishing frequencies.
  • A logical info tree.
  • Developed a strong reputation for useful, correct information

When developing webpages within the topic clusters, except for semantics and good key phrase research, it’s also essential to understand the basics of pure language interfaces, particularly the Stanford Natural Language Inference (SNLI) corpus.

The basics of this are that you should take a look at the hypothesis against the text, and the conclusion is both that the textual content entails, contradicts, or is neutral towards the speculation.

For a search engine, if the webpage contradicts the speculation, then it will have low worth and shouldn’t be retrieved or ranked. Whereas if the webpage entails, or is impartial in opposition to the query, then it might be considered for ranking to both provide the reply and potential non-bias perspective (depending on the query).

We do this to an extent through content material hubs/content clusters which have turn out to be more popular prior to now 5 years as methods of demonstrating E-A-T and creating linkable, high-authority belongings for non-brand search phrases.

This is achieved through good information architecture on the website, and being concise in our topical clusters and inside linking, making it simpler for search engines like google, at scale, to digest.

Understand source sorts to inform your web optimization strategy

By better understanding the supply sorts rating most prominently for the target search queries, we are in a position to produce higher methods and forecasting that yield more quick outcomes.

This is a greater choice as an alternative of driving towards search phrases that we’re merely not acceptable for and won’t likely see a return in site visitors against the useful resource funding.

Opinions expressed on this article are those of the guest author and not essentially Search Engine Land. Staff authors are listed right here.

New on Search Engine Land

About The Author

Dan Taylor is head of technical web optimization at, a UK-based technical search engine optimization specialist and winner of the 2022 Queens Award. Dan works with and oversees a team working with companies starting from expertise and SaaS corporations to enterprise e-commerce.

Share this article

Recent posts


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Recent comments