- A comparison keyword strategy shared on X reportedly generated more than 3,400 clicks and 46,500 impressions in three months, with an average Google position of 6.8.
- Comparison searches often sit much closer to purchase decisions than broad informational queries, making them valuable even when search volume is lower.
Comparison keywords are not glamorous, but they are often much closer to revenue than the broad informational terms most content calendars chase.
Someone searching “Ahrefs vs SEMrush” or “SEO vs PPC” is not casually learning the category. They already know the options. They are comparing, narrowing and deciding.
That is why a July 8 post from @seo_wins caught attention. The account shared a brief case study claiming that a comparison keyword strategy brought in more than 3,400 organic visitors over three months.
We focused on comparison keywords.
That strategy brought in 3,400+ visitors.
Here’s our SEO strategy:
pic.twitter.com/jg2mZ2vv6l— SEO Wins (@seo_wins) July 8, 2026
According to the screenshot shared in the thread, the site recorded 3.41k clicks, 46.5k impressions, a 7.3% average CTR and an average position of 6.8 across a three-month window ending in early July 2026.
Those figures come from the poster’s own screenshot and are not independently verified. Still, the strategy behind them is worth paying attention to because it matches a pattern many SEO teams underuse: comparison pages can reach buyers at the moment they are choosing between options.
Why Comparison Keywords Work
Comparison searches carry a different kind of intent.
A person searching “best SEO tools” may still be exploring. A person searching “Ahrefs vs Semrush” is already inside the decision process. They are looking for differences, trade-offs, pricing, use cases and reasons to choose one option over another.
That makes the traffic more commercially useful.
The search volume is usually lower than broad informational terms, but the user is often more valuable. A visitor arriving through a comparison query does not need a category introduction. They need help making a decision.
That is why these pages can perform well for SaaS, agencies, ecommerce products, marketplaces and B2B services. Any market where buyers compare tools, vendors or approaches can create comparison keyword opportunities.
The Opportunity Is Often Easier Than the Head Terms
The @seo_wins thread used “Ahrefs vs SEMrush” as one example. A keyword difficulty card shared in the post showed the term at 24 out of 100 in Ahrefs, classed as medium difficulty.
That is the appeal.
Competing for a broad term like “SEO tools” can require years of authority, links and brand recognition. Competing for a narrower comparison query is a different problem. The content requirement is more specific, the SERP is often thinner, and mid-authority sites can sometimes compete if the page is genuinely useful.
The SEO Wins team has also written about comparison keywords, arguing that these pages are often neglected despite their commercial value.
That neglect creates an opening. Many brands either avoid comparison content because it feels too sales-focused, or they publish weak pages that do not actually compare anything. Both mistakes leave room for sites willing to do the work properly.
A Good Comparison Page Cannot Be a Thin Pitch
Comparison pages only work when they respect the searcher’s intent.
A user searching “Tool A vs Tool B” does not want a disguised landing page pretending to be objective. They want a clear answer to a practical question: which option is better for my situation?
That means the page needs to compare the things buyers actually care about:
pricing, core features, learning curve, integrations, support, limitations, use cases, reporting, onboarding, contract terms and real-world fit.
The stronger page is not always the one that says “our product wins.” It is the one that explains where each option makes sense and where it does not. That kind of page builds trust because it helps the user decide instead of forcing a conclusion.
Google’s own AI search guidance points in a similar direction: content that is original, useful and non-commodity is more likely to hold value across search experiences. A comparison page that simply rewrites public product descriptions is weak. A page that adds testing, examples and decision criteria is much harder to replace.
AI Search Makes Comparison Content More Important
Comparison content also fits the way AI search is evolving.
When users ask ChatGPT, Perplexity, Gemini or Google AI Overviews which tool, vendor or approach they should choose, the system often summarizes options instead of sending users straight to a list of results.
That puts comparison content in a stronger position.
According to Search Engine Land’s guide to Google AI Overviews, comparison and decision-stage queries are among the search types where AI-generated summaries can appear. When that happens, pages that clearly structure differences, pros, cons and use cases are easier for AI systems to extract from.
This connects with a broader shift in SEO. As The Query Post recently covered, AI search rewards content that is crawlable, structured and easy to retrieve. Comparison pages naturally fit that format when they are built well.
Clear headings, concise comparison tables, direct summaries, named entities and specific claims all help. They make the page better for users and easier for retrieval systems to understand.
Ranking First Is Not the Only Way to Win
The AI search layer also changes how marketers should think about visibility.
Ahrefs’ analysis of nearly 4 million AI Overview URLs found that a declining share of AI Overview citations come from pages ranking in Google’s top 10 compared with earlier measurements. That suggests AI citation opportunities do not always map perfectly to traditional rankings.
For comparison content, that matters.
A page may not dominate the main head term, but it can still become useful across a cluster of specific decision-stage prompts. “Tool A vs Tool B for agencies,” “Tool A alternatives for small teams,” and “best Tool B competitor for reporting” are all different searches with similar commercial intent.
That is why comparison keyword strategy should not be limited to one big page. The stronger approach is usually a cluster: direct comparisons, alternatives pages, category comparisons and use-case-specific decision pages.
How Marketers Should Use This
The practical starting point is simple: map the decisions your customers already make.
For a SaaS company, that might include competitor comparisons, alternative pages and “best tool for” queries. For a SEO agency, it might include service comparisons such as “SEO vs PPC,” “in-house SEO vs agency,” or “local SEO agency vs freelancer.” For ecommerce, it might mean product comparisons, material comparisons or “brand A vs brand B” pages.
The important part is not just finding the keyword. It is understanding the decision behind it.
A strong comparison page should answer who each option is best for, where each option falls short, what the real trade-offs are and what a buyer should check before choosing. It should also be honest enough to say when the competitor is the better fit.
That is what separates a useful comparison page from a sales page with “vs” in the title.
The Takeaway
Comparison keywords are not a shortcut, but they are often a smarter target than broad informational terms.
They attract users who already understand the category, already know some of the options and are closer to making a decision. The traffic ceiling may be smaller, but the commercial intent is much stronger.
For teams with limited authority, comparison pages can create a realistic path into competitive SERPs. For stronger brands, they can capture decision-stage demand before it goes to review sites, Reddit threads or competitors.
The best place to start is not with the biggest keyword in your market.
It is with the comparison your buyer is already making.
