Thoughts on Zero Search and "Unit Conversion" Keywords

[KevinOH]

Good people, two questions:

1. What are your thoughts on zero search keywords. Are they worth targeting?

I'm trying to be an authority in my niche and I'm wondering whether writing articles targeted at keywords that get zero searches would be worth it, or whether the articles will just be depleting my crawl budget for nothing.

2. Another question, I'm coming across "unit conversion keywords". What I mean is something like "what is 20 kilometers in meters". Some of these keywords have decent search volumes.

I know the user intent in such a case is to find the answer to the question. As a result, my competitors are putting calculators et al, which get ranked for these keywords. But the articles ranking are not optimized for the specific "what is 20 kilometers in meters" keyword. I guess they are ranking because of the calculators.

Would creating an article around ""what is 20 kilometers in meters" make sense? Also, would word count here really matter? I mean, the question could be answered in 30 words or less.

 

[DanielS]

1. What are your thoughts on zero search keywords. Are they worth targeting?

I wouldn't make the mistake I made and write 150 articles all targeting keywords with a 0-10 monthly searches, but I will say that the most popular blog post on my website (currently) targets a 0 search volume primary keyword- it gets over 1,000 organic searches each month and has been for months now.

2. Another question, I'm coming across "unit conversion keywords". What I mean is something like "what is 20 kilometers in meters". Some of these keywords have decent search volumes.

I feel like these keywords will just end up getting a calculator widget with the calculated answer placed at the top of the SERP eventually by Google, let alone a featured snippet with a direct answer. However, I feel like it might be worth putting together a couple articles that target keywords like this and adding some information about how you arrived at the answer, different ways you could calculate the answer, etc could be a good idea.

 

[Ryuzaki]

1. What are your thoughts on zero search keywords. Are they worth targeting?

You'll find the random zero volume keyword that has hundreds of long-tails behind it that rake in a few thousand visits a month if you can dominate all of the variations.

But you're far more likely to find keywords like that by at least going up to 300 - 500 volume (if you want to play in the low volume range). If the parent keyword has at least that many searches, it's validating your shot in the dark to a degree. Otherwise you risk wasting a lot of time.

2. Another question, I'm coming across "unit conversion keywords". What I mean is something like "what is 20 kilometers in meters". Some of these keywords have decent search volumes.

Writing articles for these, or even short 30 word pages... You already said it. Google is ranking calculators. That's the intent of article they want to surface. I'd say it's "make a calculator or bust".

I feel like these keywords will just end up getting a calculator widget with the calculated answer placed at the top of the SERP eventually by Google

They already do:

The tiny fraction of clicks left from people who want more answers and won't use the In-SERP calculator... you'll be fighting over getting them to click to your calculator instead of someone else's calculator. It'll be an uphill battle to rank for no good reason, honestly.

I'd say to abandon this entire line of thinking and target keywords you know people are searching for and ones that Google isn't supplying an answer for in the SERPs where they don't need to click a result.

 

[CCarter]

Another technique I talk about in a recent blog post is using Google Trends. Using your scenario you can use Trends to compare those zero keyword volumes against each other and higher volume terms.

The data from some keyword tools may be old and/or not up-to date due to the nature of their sourcing. So example - something might be really hot right now, like, I dunno "COVID Zeta", yet several keyword tools will have 0 volume since it is so brand new. You can get around this by using Google Trends, which even allows you to localize to a city results:

Source: People Also Ask Tips For Local SEO​

You will not get search volumes but you'll be able to do comparisons, and if you know the search volume of a term like "braces" you can guesstimate the volume of lesser known terms.

Link: Google Trends

 

[smithy]

I wouldn't bother with zero volume keywords. I've had some success targeting 10-20 volume keywords, though I only go to the trouble if they're at the bottom of the funnel.

Everyone else ignores them, which means no competition, and you can bring in an additional few hundred dollars in affiliate income a month if you stumble upon a couple of good ones.

 

[KevinOH]

Another technique I talk about in a recent blog post is using Google Trends. Using your scenario you can use Trends to compare those zero keyword volumes against each other and higher volume terms.

The data from some keyword tools may be old and/or not up-to date due to the nature of their sourcing. So example - something might be really hot right now, like, I dunno "COVID Zeta", yet several keyword tools will have 0 volume since it is so brand new. You can get around this by using Google Trends, which even allows you to localize to a city results:

Source: People Also Ask Tips For Local SEO​

You will not get search volumes but you'll be able to do comparisons, and if you know the search volume of a term like "braces" you can guesstimate the volume of lesser known terms.

Link: Google Trends

This Trends search thing is actually good. I just popped my main KW on trends and I'm seeing some KWs that are bursting out in terms of search volume, which however, haven't been picked up by the main KW tools.

Thanks for this.

 

[KevinOH]

I wouldn't make the mistake I made and write 150 articles all targeting keywords with a 0-10 monthly searches

The website already has about 300 articles targeting medium search volume KWs, say 100-2000 US monthly searches.

You'll find the random zero volume keyword that has hundreds of long-tails behind it that rake in a few thousand visits a month if you can dominate all of the variations.

The zero search KWs I am thinking of are highly targeted commercial intent KWs. Definitely, they are not likely to garner 1000s of views a month, but I'm thinking more in terms of sales.

So, the products are low ticket (mostly from $40-$100). So, my commissions range from $4 to $10. But its a volume product that people such for everyday.

My crossroads is whether going or these no search or low search (10 monthly searches) commercial intent keywords would make sense or whether the additional articles would just be making my website big for nothing.

I already have articles written for KWs in the range of 100-2000 US monthly searches. Other high search volume keywords are either to generic or too competitive to realistically rank at this time.

Appreciate your responses and thoughts, everyone.

 

[CCarter]

Here is some further evidence that keywords with zero volume get traffic:

Source: Don't trust search volume metrics when doing keyword research!

 

[Philip J. Fry]

If a keyword really received 0 searches per month, how does the keyword tool know about it?

It is because it received more than 0 searches per month.

 

[Nobody]

Interesting, the question is who says it's 0... Google-Keyword-Planner? Ahref? Semrush?
It would be interesting checking a bunch of "0" Keywords with different Tools and also make longtail research based on these Keywords.

"0 Keywords" can be sometimes a Box of Chocolate.

 

[larcha]

Zero search volume phrases certainly have value and should be targeted towards the beginning stages of building up a site. I have seen numerous success stories of sites hitting 1000-4000+ organic sessions per day just from zero search, very low competition keywords.

In some instances, while some of these keywords say "zero volume" in the SEO tools, there are other related terms that might be tied to some other levels of search volume where it makes sense that targeting these keywords could yield articles receiving 500+ organic sessions per month.

What I have noticed is that having that extra expertise in a topic really allows you to uncover some of these terms, as you may better understand relevant questions and topics in your niche that someone may search. Sometimes watching an informational video or purchasing a book within your niche can give you some great ideas for topics in the zero search volume universe.

To prove how effective zero search volume keywords can be, let's do some quick math. Let's say you target 1 zero search volume keyword article per day for the next 3 years (~1000 words). Either you take ~1 hour to write that article or you can outsource in the range of $20-40 per article. Over the course of the those 3 years you will have 1095 articles. Since those topics are very low competition, you should be top 3 for most of those keywords.

If each article only received 50 organic sessions per month (on average):

• 50 sessions/per month * 1095 articles = 54,750 sessions/per month
• Apply to Mediavine
• Make over $1200 per month just from ads
• Gain some authority via natural links & topical relevancy to jumpstart growing the site further

With these assumptions, the project would take 1095 hours of your time to write these articles or cost you $20,000-40,000 in outsourcing the content. But the assumption of 50 sessions/per month for each article is an extremely low projection.

Imagine that each article received 100 sessions/per month, then the site would be at 100,000 sessions per month which could bring in $2,500 per month in ads from informational content. Slap a 30-40x multiple on that and you now have an asset worth $75,000-100,000. Not bad if you only invested $20,000-40,000 on outsourcing content as well as the money you would be receiving on a monthly basis until you sold. Adding in your unique skillset only improves these numbers and helps justify this opportunity vs. other financial or business investments.

Of course this would be either a big time or financial commitment (or a combination of both), but we are talking zero volume informational keywords! It works.

 

[tyealia]

Zero search volume phrases certainly have value and should be targeted towards the beginning stages of building up a site. I have seen numerous success stories of sites hitting 1000-4000+ organic sessions per day just from zero search, very low competition keywords.

In some instances, while some of these keywords say "zero volume" in the SEO tools, there are other related terms that might be tied to some other levels of search volume where it makes sense that targeting these keywords could yield articles receiving 500+ organic sessions per month.

What I have noticed is that having that extra expertise in a topic really allows you to uncover some of these terms, as you may better understand relevant questions and topics in your niche that someone may search. Sometimes watching an informational video or purchasing a book within your niche can give you some great ideas for topics in the zero search volume universe.

To prove how effective zero search volume keywords can be, let's do some quick math. Let's say you target 1 zero search volume keyword article per day for the next 3 years (~1000 words). Either you take ~1 hour to write that article or you can outsource in the range of $20-40 per article. Over the course of the those 3 years you will have 1095 articles. Since those topics are very low competition, you should be top 3 for most of those keywords.

If each article only received 50 organic sessions per month (on average):

• 50 sessions/per month * 1095 articles = 54,750 sessions/per month
• Apply to Mediavine
• Make over $1200 per month just from ads
• Gain some authority via natural links & topical relevancy to jumpstart growing the site further

With these assumptions, the project would take 1095 hours of your time to write these articles or cost you $20,000-40,000 in outsourcing the content. But the assumption of 50 sessions/per month for each article is an extremely low projection.

Imagine that each article received 100 sessions/per month, then the site would be at 100,000 sessions per month which could bring in $2,500 per month in ads from informational content. Slap a 30-40x multiple on that and you now have an asset worth $75,000-100,000. Not bad if you only invested $20,000-40,000 on outsourcing content as well as the money you would be receiving on a monthly basis until you sold. Adding in your unique skillset only improves these numbers and helps justify this opportunity vs. other financial or business investments.

Of course this would be either a big time or financial commitment (or a combination of both), but we are talking zero volume informational keywords! It works.

Great breakdown, this is actually how I look at content as I have my writers go into it. Its all about the revenue per article calculations in the long term. Each article written for $20-50 has the potential to bring in double that on a yearly basis especially for zero search keywords. The keyword tools these days with the loss of real data since the antivirus scandle has gone way down. I would argue you almost don't know what any of these tiny search traffic keywords get. Many of my best performing keywords for info articles are zero search keywords.

Matt D did a great article in his blog outlining how many articles different niches have on average per site to be successful for example a sports niche site on polo may have 500 articles, most of these will be zero click searches with which you'll probably be hitting longtails.