Analyzing the impact of Google’s helpful content updates

Google’s infamous algorithm updates have taken creators and publishers on a tumultuous ride over the last twelve months, devastating traffic for some sites while boosting traffic for others, leaving creators with a growing list of questions but little clarity. 

In theory, these updates are designed to promote a better reader experience by connecting users with the content they’re searching for, so everyone walks away satisfied. In practice, the experience isn’t quite so streamlined, especially for creators looking for answers on how to make sure their high-quality content continues to appear in search results. 

At Raptive, we conducted a deep data analysis specifically on the holistic impact of the August to March core and helpful content algorithm updates, which we shared in detail with Raptive creators and publishers in our recent webinar, Understanding Google’s Approach to Helpful Content.

How we analyzed the data

We looked at a huge amount of data during our analysis and it can be cut in multiple ways. Many different things happened to many different sites, and focusing on averages hides the full story. All of this makes it difficult—if not impossible—to draw meaningful conclusions that apply to all sites.

Every time these updates occur, they shake the snow globe all over again. What we learned from one update may no longer be true after the next. Sites in our dataset could also have been impacted by other algorithm systems released over the last few months, including the October and March spam updates. 

The information here is based on our most up-to-date analysis, and it may shift after the next update, which is rumored to be very soon. We’ll continue to dedicate time and resources to analyzing the data, because it’s important to creators and for understanding where search is headed. 

While we believe our analysis is based on the largest dataset using Google Analytics, it’s still only a small sample of the entire universe of websites.

Our analysis included:

• 3400 Raptive sites
• 30+ verticals
• 20+ site characteristics
• 24 months of historical data

4 key takeaways

We looked at over 20 site characteristics to find correlations with the core updates; here’s some of what we found.

1. It’s about user experience, not INP itself

Interaction to Next Paint, or INP, is Google’s most recent Core Web Vital metric, measuring how quickly your site responds to reader interaction. Some sites in our dataset scored poorly on INP, but saw big traffic increases after the updates, while some sites with great INP scores were hit hard in terms of traffic. 

INP and the other Core Web Vital metrics continue to be important. Our engineering team is leaving no stone unturned as they investigate ways to improve INP scores, and their tests have already uncovered new opportunities that we’ve put into motion. 

We’ll keep running experiments to help creators achieve better INP scores. And while you should keep optimizing for INP, don’t lose sight of the bigger picture—providing a good user experience overall.  

2. Specific data points are a red herring

Sites with higher pages per session were more likely to have a positive outcome from the updates. But plenty of sites with high pages per session were hit hard, while sites with low pages per session did well. 

To further muddy the waters, sites with worse bounce rates fared slightly better in terms of SEO impact from the updates. And of course, we’d never advise you to aim for a bad bounce rate! 

So what does it all mean? Much like INP, focusing on specific data points isn’t the solution. These data points are small components of a larger whole, but you shouldn’t ignore them entirely. They give us clues to user experience regardless of how they relate to the core updates as isolated data points. 

3. No correlation between the amount of low/no traffic content and HCU impact

There’s a belief that low-traffic content can be bad for SEO, but in this case our data suggests that it’s statistically insignificant. We do think it’s important to keep your site clean and streamlined, but it’s not something that will change the equation. 

Even if old, outdated content isn’t currently impacting your site traffic, it could be flagged for some other reason in the future. 

4. No correlation was found for the amount of ads running on a site

We looked at a range of ad-related metrics, like video versus display units, high-impact ad units, ad density, and more. We also ran tests using a control group and turned off ads entirely on certain pages. The result showed no appreciable change in traffic between the pages with ads and the pages without. 

While we didn’t find a relationship between core updates and ads in this instance, we’ll continue to test to make sure we’re coming to the right conclusions and to stay on top of any future changes. 

And no matter what we find, we want you to have the fastest, most reader-friendly ads possible. We’re always working behind the scenes to make sure this is the case.

Moving forward, the focus is on authenticity

We looked at many other data points than what we covered here, but the overall stories were very similar: no one factor stood out with a high correlation. There were some notable similarities across sites that did well, but nothing universal. Sites that seemed to do everything ‘right’ were still impacted.

The big takeaway is that this latest Google algorithm is more sophisticated than previous versions, which is probably why it took 45 days to complete the March 2024 Core update. Google’s new AI systems and LLMs enable the algorithm to analyze more content quality factors than ever before—at scale. 

This holistic approach means it no longer has to rely on single data points like bounce rate or ad density to measure content quality, and it might be a while before we start seeing definitive correlations like we did in the past. The new algorithm isn’t perfect, and many prominent SEOs have documented egregious examples where the right information is not surfacing. And, of course, the next version we’re all anticipating any day now probably won’t be perfect either. 

So as a creator and small business owner, where do you go from here? 

The era of easy traffic is over. Authentic, quality traffic wins.    

The next steps are less about individual data points and more about looking at your content from a holistic perspective. Be candid with yourself about what’s working and what’s not working, and don’t be afraid to make changes. 

In the webinar, we ran through a list of tactics you can use to assess your content, including what we see that’s working and what strategies to avoid. We put together a checklist that covers it all, and you can download it below.  

The big question: can sites recover? 

While it’s too soon to say for sure, here’s what we’re seeing so far.

First, for sites that have been walloped—we’re talking a 90% drop in SEO traffic—we’re still not seeing any recovery. Then there’s a group of sites that took a more modest but still significant hit to traffic in the 10%-30% range, where we’re starting to see recovery as those sites optimize their content. 

Google has said that the first group of hard-hit sites will need to wait for the next update to have a chance at recovery, and we’ll be monitoring closely to see what happens. 

And until then, lean into your passion, skills, and expertise—and keep creating content.