Google's Keyword tool Vs Wordtracker

[staffjam]

Hi,

I was wondering how you are finding the new google keywords tool is in comparison to wordtracker?
As I'm finding the results can differ quite significantly and it's getting a little confusing which results to use when having articles written and which keywords are/aren't popular.
E.g.
Mobile phones - Google: 13,600,000 searches - Wordtracker: 862 searches
Cell phones - Google: 90,500 searches - Wordtracker: 4097 searches.

Also does anyone know if google search just picks out the keywords from sentences and wordtracker lists the whole request - e.g. the search is: Great mobile phone deals - now does wordtracker use the whole sentence as one search and google would just pick out Mobile phone?

Thanks for any comments

 

[RicoShay]

I'd be interested in know about this too. Good points staffjam.

 

[soggyindo]

these questions are coming up all the time, and pretty central for what we do.

does staff put up a sticky for such times? not sure what the rules are there but might be good...

 

[-NC-]

Are you referring to google's KeywordToolExternal?

If so, when using that, I always select "Exact Match" from the dropdown on the right. Which gives me an avg search volume of 165,000 for [mobile phones]. AFAIK, wordtracker quotes daily stats, so about 30K. still a huge discrepancy, but not quite as large as the numbers you found.

Personally, I'm inclined to trust the google numbers over the wordtracker numbers.

 

[Mark]

Although I've always been a fan of the Wordtracker tool ... I'm finding myself going to the google tool more each day now. No telling on how they compare really , But I have noticed "search phrases" on WT being arranged wrong more often like OVT was many times. When using any Keyword tools , You have to use common sense and do more research on your own IMO ... I see phrases even on the Google tool that makes little sense.

The way I look at it in the end though : Who pretty much Dominates the Search World ?

 

[bluearrow]

I guess Googlekeyword tool stats are more accurate than worktracker. I wouldn't wait this long to launch it unless they were perfecting it.

 

[soggyindo]

Reece said something interesting about Google's results being wiser than just searches, but all examples of a person's ads appearing - including adsense ads on people's websites??

 

[estibot.com]

Wordtracker is good, but it's incomplete. There is a lot - a LOT more data in the Google database. It's all there. You may get 0 searches using wordtracker for a lot of terms that actually do have significant search popularity from a domainer's point of view.

Currently I cross-check between Google and Wordtracker. Like Mark said, Google also gives popularity to some phrases that make little sense. It could be that people type those in by accident, or something else.

Google's tool also is not reliable. Sometimes it gives "insufficient data", the next day, "10,000". Their database is probably something to dominate the Universe with, but the tool itself is buggy.

Also there is a discrepancy between the High CPC bids and advertiser competition. I know they are not the same thing, but to me it seems like the discrepancy is too big.

Also there are discrepancies when you compare their "advertiser competition" and "high cpc bid" and then the actual number of ads that appear in Google searches. I tend to trust the number and quality of the actual ads for domaining/SEO purposes. I wouldn't trust the tool too much. When checking the ads, use this format:

http://www.google.com/search?adtest=on&hl=en&gl=US&q="your term"

Change the gl=US to whatever country and hl=en to whatever language you wish to check for.

To me that's the best way to evaluate a search term's desirability and advertiser competition at a glance.

I'm currently experimenting a lot with the new Google tool. You can check the available domain names board for my thread, which has examples of search term numbers and available domain names found using the Google tool.

Again like Mark said, Google rules the search world, and they are Gods when it comes to search data. To me it seems we are incredibly lucky to have this resource, especially from a company that generally is not webmaster friendly.

I consider the Google search tool by far the best tool that is out there. It's also extremely smart when researching related terms and long-tail terms. Google have their semantics together better than anyone out there.

I have a lot of thoughts on this matter, I'm doing a lot of research right now and will post a follow up once I reach some definitive conclusions.

Oh yes, whoever said that the Google data is not just search popularity but something to do with how often ads are appearing, I think this is incorrect: to the best of my knowledge, this is genuine search popularity data, it's probably the closest you will ever know to how many times a given search term is actually typed in to the google search box each month.

I emphasize that these are just my opinions based on my personal research, so I could be wrong though I think I'm right

Also, with the Google tool I've found it's easy to find search terms with high KEI (keyword effectiveness index) - those are great for SEO.


Oh yes, whoever said that the Google data is not just search popularity but something to do with how often ads are appearing, I think this is incorrect: to the best of my knowledge, this is genuine search popularity data, it's probably the closest you will ever know to how many times a given search term is actually typed in to the google search box each month.

I emphasize that these are just my opinions based on my personal research, so I could be wrong though I think I'm right

 

[RicoShay]

Thanks for that Esa, definitely clears up a few things.

I use a few tactics picked up from various domain guides / blogs etc... I did a little experiment and found that the Google tool does come closest - or at least gives better results in comparison to wordtracker. But it was a very basic test... so nothing conclusive - just peace of mind for me. I still suggest using both tools though.

 

[Pred]

i miss overture though :imho:

 

[Michael]

I prefer the Google tool. WT gets its data from Dogpile and various other search engines that nobody uses. Google is the leader in search, so I want to know what their results are. OVT was nice back in the day, and I heard they'll have a new tool out in 2009, but for now I'm sticking with the Adwords keyword tool.

 

[vitalir]

A recent thought on Google Adwords.

Task: estimate the likelihood of topping google search results with a domain AB.com where A and B - keywords (obviously when developed).

Apparent solution is typing 'A B' into the Google Adwords tool and getting the results back - hurray! - you got 100,000 searches let's say. Pretty good you think, however this number does NOT seem to be the relevant answer for the task.

Why? Take a look here: https://adwords.google.com/support/bin/answer.py?answer=6324&ctx=tltp
You need to select Exact as Match Type because numbers for all other options include searches with additional words to yours A and B. For such searches your AB.com won't top the search results (assuming there is a decent competition).

After selecting Exact match the numbers drop significantly for many keywords, but stay solid for the real good ones.

Correct me if I'm wrong.

 

[estibot.com]

Using Exact is recommended, but using the "phrase" option is also good for getting an idea of the size of the long tail for that term. "Broad" can be viewed for general information, but should not be considered when researching domain names.

Also, if you want to SEO to the top of the SERPs, you've got to look at keyword effectiveness index as well, not just the search results. If you have 100,000 searches it's very likely a high competition keyword with lots of search results -> impossible to compete with existing sites.

Look for high search popularity, low frequency - that's just one of the things to look for though - getting that optimal keyword combo requires a lot of research.

 

[soggyindo]

relating to esa's comment about if the adwords tool is just search or not

(and IMO estibot is close to domaining what google is to search!)

:hearts:

i'd still have to go with reece's about adwords including the content network site figures, until we hear definitely differently..?

i read somewhere (a blog for advertisers) the figures includes three things -

Google Search
Search Network (includes google groups sites and Ask.com and AOL)
Content Network (adsense ads)

which i guess makes sense - google's tool is made for advertisers wanting to place ads over the whole network...

unless there's somewhere else where they can check the whole figure of what google offers..?

anyway, i'm doing some research on this too (as we all are). an early rough estimate is that it only throws out the figures by approx 10%. but i'll post it all here when done.