Mobile SEO Case Study

March 3, 2015

Mobile SEO

Case Study:

Bryson Meunier

SEO Director, Vivid Seats

@BrysonMeunier

searchmarketingexpo.com@BrysonMeunier

#SMX #21D

MOBILE FRIENDLY: A QUESTION WITH MORE THAN ONE RIGHT ANSWER


#SMX #21D

DYNAMIC SERVING IS ONE RIGHT ANSWER


#SMX #21D

1. Does fixing the mobile usability errors drastically increase mobile search traffic or revenue or dramatically decrease bounce rate?

2. Does having a mobile friendly label in Google increase click through rate in a statistically significant way?

CASE STUDY: FIXING MOBILE USABILITY ERRORS


#SMX #21D

20,000 TO 1,000 ERRORS IN UNDER 4 MONTHS


#SMX #21D


Identified corresponding

template

Prioritized based on revenue

impact

Redesigned priority

templates


#SMX #21D



#SMX #21D



#SMX #21D

Start with list of 2000 mobile pages with errors fixed between 9/09 – 10/25Keep only pages with sessionsVast majority occur in October500 pages remaining

Goals:Are total number of fixed pages correlated to average number of sessions, bounce rate, or revenue?Does average sessions/day, bounce rate/day, or revenue/day increase as mobile errors are fixed relative to randomized control sample?

METHODOLOGY


#SMX #21D

Control group comprised of 1000 randomly selected mobile landing pages with similar number of sessions but with unfixed errorsControl group linear fit has a slope consistent with zeroR = 0.03 (no linear correlation) • Linear fit to test group also has a slope consistent with zeroR = 0.17 (no linear correlation) NO statistically significant difference between correlation coefficient with control group (p = 0.66)NO statistically significant difference between fit slope with control group (p = 0.48)

MEASURED CORRELATION BETWEEN FIXED ERRORS AND BOUNCE RATE, SESSIONS AND REVENUE


#SMX #21D

• Investigated correlation between sessions, bounce rate, or revenue vs. total number of fixed mobile errors

In all cases, we found no linear correlation

• Investigated average sessions/day, bounce rate/day, or revenue/day increase as mobile errors are fixed relative to randomized control sample

In all cases, the correlation coefficients and slopes of the test groups and control groups are indistinguishable.

NO DIFFERENCE BEFORE AND AFTER MOBILE USABILITY ERRORS FIXED


#SMX #21D

1. Fixing mobile usability errors has no immediate effect on traffic, revenue, or bounce rate from mobile search traffic

2. No apparent mobile usability algorithm exists as of 2/17/2015. If it exists it may not be worth the effort.

3. Going to continue measuring to see if effect is delayed

DOES FIXING MOBILE USABILITY ERRORS HELP WITH SEO OR USER EXPERIENCE?


#SMX #21D

DOES MOBILE FRIENDLY LABEL HELP CTR?


#SMX #21D

MFT introduced on 11/18/2014Sample includes 21 landing pages having traffic between 11/13/2014 and 11/30/2014 with a variance in average page position of < 0.2 throughout that timeAverage CTR before MFT: 13.5%Average CTR AFTER MFT: 13.4% DIFFERENCE IN AVERAGE CTR IS NOT STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT



#SMX #21D

1. No statistically significant difference in average CTR before and after mobile-friendly label

2. Limited data set3. All competitors have

mobile friendly label, which could affect results

4. Going to continue monitoring to see if effect is delayed.



#SMX #21D

1. Assumptions about mobile usability and SEO are not necessarily supported by data today

2. More testing is needed to support conclusions, as this is one site and doesn’t account for potential delay in benefit

3. Still recommend continuing with priority fixes that aren’t cost prohibitive, and measuring results

FINAL THOUGHTS


#SMX #21D

February 16, 2015

Appendix: Effect of Mobile Fixes on Sessions, Bounce Rate, and Revenue

Dr. David Pignotti

Data Scientist, Vivid Seats


#SMX #21D

Start with list of 2000 mobile pages with errors fixed between 9/09 – 10/25

Keep only pages with sessionsVast majority occur in October500 pages remainingGoals:Are total number of fixed pages correlated to average number of sessions, bounce rate, or revenue?Does average sessions/day, bounce rate/day, or revenue/day increase as mobile errors are fixed relative to randomized control sample?


#SMX #21D

Average Sessions/Day Vs. Total Number of Fixed Pages

Correlation coefficient (R) = 0.26

No linear correlation


#SMX #21D

Average Sessions/day over time for test group and control group

Control group comprised of 1000 randomly selected mobile landing pages with similar number of sessions but with unfixed errorsControl group linear fit has a slight negative slopeR = 0.32 (weak linear correlation) Linear fit to test group also has slight negative slopeR = 0.30 (weak linear correlation) NO statistically significant difference between correlation coefficient with control group (p = 0.95)NO statistically significant difference between fit slope with control group (p = 0.82)


#SMX #21D

Average Bounce Rate/Day Vs. Total Number of Fixed Pages




#SMX #21D

Average Bounce Rate/day over time for test group and control group



#SMX #21D

Average Revenue/Day Vs. Total Number of Fixed Pages




#SMX #21D

Average Bounce Rate/day over time for test group and control group



#SMX #21D

Summary

Investigated correlation between sessions, bounce rate, or revenue vs. total number of fixed mobile

errors

In all cases, we found no linear correlation

• Investigated average sessions/day, bounce rate/day, or revenue/day increase as mobile errors

are fixed relative to randomized control sample

In all cases, the correlation coefficients and slopes of the test groups and control groups are

indistinguishable.


#SMX #21D

Does introduction of Google’s “Mobile Friendly Tag” increase CTR?

Does introduction of Google’s “Mobile Friendly Tag” (MFT) increase CTR?MFT introduced on 11/18/2014Sample includes 21 landing pages having traffic between 11/13/2014 and 11/30/2014 with a variance in average page position of < 0.2 throughout that timeAverage CTR before MFT: 13.5%Average CTR AFTER MFT: 13.4% DIFFERENCE IN AVERAGE CTR IS NOT STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT


#SMX #21D

Does introduction of Google’s “Mobile Friendly Tag” increase CTR?

Does introduction of Google’s “Mobile Friendly Tag” (MFT) increase CTR?MFT introduced on 11/18/2014Sample includes 21 landing pages having traffic between 11/13/2014 and 11/30/2014 with a variance in average page position of < 0.2 throughout that timeWeighted (impressions) average CTR before MFT: 9.6%Weighted (impressions) average CTR AFTER MFT: 9.5% DIFFERENCE IN AVERAGE CTR IS NOT STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT

Date post:	16-Jul-2015
Category:	Data & Analytics
Upload:	bryson-meunier
View:	122 times
Download:	1 times

Mobile SEO Case Study

Data & Analytics