Changes to how Google delivers search results are disrupting some SEO tools’ data collection, making recent ranking charts harder to interpret. Sistrix’s September 16 status update confirms that collection is running more slowly while it adapts its systems.
Nozzle’s Derek Perkins told Search Engine Roundtable’s Barry Schwartz that the amount of data he could retrieve from Google had fallen by about 80%. That figure describes his collection results; it does not measure a decline in websites’ rankings or traffic.
The effects appear uneven. Schwartz also reported Glenn Gabe’s comparison of a site whose traffic had recovered after a sharp fall. Ahrefs reflected the recovery, Semrush showed it with a delay, and Sistrix had not picked it up. That example illustrates a reporting lag, but cannot establish the reliability of each provider across its entire database.
Google’s redirects were an earlier obstacle
SEW previously covered Google’s rollout of opaque /goto redirects, which made collecting destination URLs more laborious. Tools had to follow those redirects to discover which websites appeared in the results.
Sistrix says it resolved the resulting processing delays by September 1. Its September 16 notice reports further changes without identifying the mechanism, so the latest slowdown should not automatically be blamed on the same redirects.
Google’s published spam policies explicitly include unauthorized scraping for rank checking under prohibited automated traffic. The policy establishes Google’s position, but does not explain this particular incident.
Missing data can outlast the disruption
Sistrix’s status history contains a detail worth checking before using these charts in a client report. After a separate disruption in August, the company said normal daily keyword updates had resumed, but data from the affected days could not be updated retrospectively. A provider can fix collection and still leave gaps in the historical record.
That makes the date of the last successful collection, and whether missing periods will be filled, essential questions for affected vendors. SEW’s comparison of SEO data suppliers explains why freshness and coverage matter when evaluating retrieved results. A dashboard that opens normally offers no assurance that every keyword was checked on schedule.
For your own website, compare a suspected drop with Search Console’s clicks and impressions and your recorded organic traffic over the same dates. Those metrics measure different things, but can help establish whether a visibility-chart movement coincided with a change in actual visits. Competitor charts deserve more caution when that corroborating data is unavailable, especially if the provider cannot confirm when it last collected the underlying rankings.
Source: Search Engine Roundtable.
Start the conversation by posting the first comment