Let's Talk About Word Count
So, I thought we would have a chat about word count today.
This is following an interesting article by Neil Patel who analyzed 10,000 posts.
I thought I would summarize his findings, but if you want to read the original, here is the link.
https://neilpatel.com/blog/word-count-impact-performance/
Now, if you were to ask most people on this platform, they would say you need a minimum of 1000 words to rank highly.
However, if you are following the story of the collaborative site that Partha and I are working on, you know that's not necessarily true.
All our posts are between 600 and 800 words, and I can assure you we have numerous keywords and featured snippets on page 1 of Google and Bing bringing in traffic every day.
Here's Partha's post on our results so far, after only 7 months.
https://my.wealthyaffiliate.com/parthab/blog/revealing-pp-in...
And just to clarify, the post that he mentions that is bringing in the most visitors is actually 721 words.
So, what does Neil Patel have to say?
I'm going to borrow some of his infographics, as they show the results.
He analyzed 15 different niches, and here are the average word counts for each of them.
Surprising, huh?
However, as you might imagine, it's not as simple as that!
These results were across every type of post, so for example, for a niche that uses a lot of video content, such as engineering, the word count will always be lower.
Let's look at the word count for "how-to" posts, which are the ones that can potentially bring in the most traffic.
See the difference?
Well, it's all very confusing, isn't it?
At the end of the day, always look at your competition on page 1 of Google.
As long as you thoroughly cover the entire topic, such that your visitors have no need to go elsewhere because your post is missing something and doesn't answer their question, then you will be in the best possible position.
(How annoying is it, that multi-millionaire Neil Patel can't even employ a decent proofreader who would have spotted that "entertainment" was spelled incorrectly, lol?)
Recent Comments
31
Absolutely informative information, Diane.
The highlights of the post with the most important points as snippets are helpful for visitors.
Having a video in each post is awesome.
It would be interesting to see the duration of session. It may not matter in the end.
Parth's contribution is admirable to many here.
Thank you, Diane.
Maybe my eyes are wired for detail, Diane.
I read Neil's article and one of the first things that jumped out was the incorrect spelling of 'entertainment'.
Ah well.
It was a very interesting article and, of course, you and the Prince came to mind.
I trust that this will put many of our members at ease.
Rather than fluffing (Sorry. No pun there, my Queen.) their blog posts, just stick with the direct, clear information.
Thank you for sharing.
Cassi
Hi, Diane
I don’t really concern myself with trying to hit a minimal word count for articles on my guitar website. I find it almost impossible to say everything in less than 1500 words and most of my articles are above 2000 words.
I always look at my competition on page one of Google and it’s not very hard to write a more comprehensive article, simply by saying what I have been preaching for years. 😊
Frank🎸
Mick stated what I originally thought. At the end of the day best is to follow Google guidelines. That is a better alternative than the SEO digital gurus. Even Matthew Woodward, SEO UK guru has his own case studies and they do bring different results from NP. All of us are at the mercy of what Google algorithm does.
See more comments
I am baffled Diane. I do agree that if you can answer the question thoroughly in fewer words, then don't add more words just to please Google.
Here is my confusion. Why is it that in WA we are taught to write more rather than less? And the reason given is that it makes Google think we are an authority on that topic. And likely to rank those wordy posts higher.
Can I answer my own question and see if you agree.
It comes down to the question we aim to answer. If it is a review of a product that has a lot of features and benefits, we have to cover all those things. The result? A post at least 1500 words and even as much as 4000.
But if we pick a simple question to answer, we should be concise and not bloat it.
Does that make sense? If I am missing something please fill me in Diane.
Thanks!
Edwin
Hi - well, obviously, I can't account as to why WA recommends a minimum of 1000 words. In fact, I am not even sure that a specific figure is mentioned in the core training, although it's a long time since I did it!
To be honest, I suspect that somebody mentioned it once somewhere, and everybody followed suit and now always quotes that figure. Similar to the "post 2 to 3 articles every week" and stick to the same schedule, week in, week out, which again is not true.
You have hit the nail on the head, though, that it depends on the type of post, the subject, and the competition.
So, for example, the posts that Partha and I write for our collaborative site are answering one specific question. So, a full, in-depth, authoritative answer can be covered in 600 to 800 words.
But for anybody doing product reviews or a more complex post, where there is a lot of information to cover, then yes, it will need to be longer.
At the end of the day, it's all about beating the competition. Realistically, if every post on page 1 of Google is 2000 words, then you are not going to beat them with only 1000 words. You must clearly be missing some information.
Hi Diane,
Your response makes a lot of sense to me. Up to now, I have been focusing on topics that demanded a lengthy response. From this point forward, I am going to use the lessons you and Partha taught to mix up the types of posts I write.
Some will be the types that need a lengthy response, while others will be to answer simpler questions that real people ask.
Thanks for your reply.
Edwin