Key findings and points

[kexej28769@nongnue]

Think about the type of job results from Google’s perspective, which is specifically for a hyperlocal audience. If you type [jobs] into Google (because that’s a lot of SEO business) and it doesn’t know where you are, what’s the search engine supposed to do?

Doesn't give you accurate local job listings, that's it.


As you can see above, only 0.01 percent of our chile number data SERPs returned the job result type, compared to 0.09 percent of our Portland SERPs and 0.10 percent of our New York SERPs.


So, what does all this mean?

Keyword intent is the biggest factor to consider when setting up your tracking. If you only care about whether you're seeing roughly the same URLs as your searchers, you canقومی سطح پر مزید عمومی کلیدی الفاظ کو ٹریک کرنے سے گریز کریں۔. Hyperlocal intent keywords that are tracked at the national level produce SERPs that are so different from the real world that you shouldn't.
Ranking order on national SERPs cannot be relied upon. Regardless of your keyword intent, if knowing where you and your competitors rank on the SERP is important to you, location tracking is the only way to go.
SERP features are more subject to the searcher’s location than organic results. For both sets of keywords, local SERPs share fewer features with their national counterparts. So, if SERP features are on your agenda, these highly personalized features are best tracked from a highly specific location. Especially if local packs are your jam.
Summary: You need to hyper-track locally if you want to get accurate results. After all, a SERP that searchers actually see at hand is worth two national SERPs in the bush.