This is my second post in a series about the March 2024 major core update. Again, this was a huge update with a lot of moving parts, so I wanted to cover several interesting things rather than just write one post. In this post I will cover a very interesting case study that highlights the complexity of the March core update. Specifically, it looks at how multiple systems were updated during the update, how these systems were able to balance each other out, and how this can cause a lot of volatility (including reversals) in the process.
This story is about a website that did well over time, but always had a lot to do in terms of content. This content was written and rated for search extremely good for many inquiries tangential related to the core business of the website. I have always referred to this content as “sideline content” because it is not directly related to the core competency of a website. Based on the content’s good ranking and its broader appeal, a majority of the site’s traffic went to this editorial content. And I’ve talked many times about the importance of “staying on track,” and this content was definitely off the mark a time or two for the company.
But that wasn’t the only place where questionable content crept in over time. There were also parts of the core e-commerce site that contained what I would describe as fluff content. Some have been around for some time, while others were added relatively recently (introduced in 2023). I will go into the content and the overall situation in more detail below.
“Danger Will Robinson!” and the “But It Counts” riddle:
I started supporting the site in 2018 and the site owner has had me check the site every year or so since then. The website has improved a lot over time, the e-commerce section is strong overall, and they had that too a lot the editorial content (as mentioned above). In any case, during these audits, I pointed out the danger of “fringe” editorial content several times, but the site owner was afraid to use the content because of its good ranking, the way it gained some powerful links over time, etc. , to touch on The site owner is SEO savvy and definitely understood the situation, but would come back to me and say: “But it ranks, so how bad could it be?”
Here’s a snapshot of spring 2023 traffic to give you a feel for how things went. The site ranked for many searches in both e-commerce and editorial content. But again, a large percentage of traffic was driven by editorial content. I’ll share more about it soon.
In addition, the editorial content had won featured snippets in 862 search queries by 2023. And this is based on SEMrush data, so they probably had more:
The “but it ranks” argument is a great point and incredibly confusing for website owners. I touched on this in my post about Navboost and explained why it is “highly visible.” AND “Low quality” is an extremely dangerous combination. Ultimately, this will not end well for a website. For the site I’m describing in this post, this decline occurred in the fall of 2023. And it was ugly.
Background information on the website, setup and more.
The website I’m covering is an e-commerce site with several editorial content sections. The site has been around for a long time and has had its fair share of SEO issues over the years. I started helping the website owner in 2018 and since then the website has been on the right track.
The core e-commerce section of the site is strong overall, offers a solid user experience and is well positioned from an SEO perspective. But there were things that crept into the core e-commerce section of the site over time that raised red flags when the site was audited. Some were newer issues that were implemented between the last time I helped the company and now. I’ll explain more about this soon, but I wanted to start with the most glaring problem – the editorial fringe content that was HCU(X) bait.
In my opinion, the editorial content has gotten out of hand. Some of the editorial content definitely fits the bill when it comes to Google’s September helpful content update (HCUX). It was content that didn’t really support the core business or its potential customers at all. Sure, it was only tangentially related to the industry the site focuses on, but it didn’t help potential customers in any way. The site owner knew people were searching for these queries and published content that targeted them. And it has been structured, optimized and written to exactly match the search queries I saw on many websites affected by the HCU(X) in September. For example, it was as if each People Also Ask (PAA) question had its own subheading and content…
But here lies the catch. This marginal editorial content was on the ranking long before fall 2023. It did really, really well. As I mentioned earlier, it had even won many featured snippets for queries about this content. In fact, so many people searched for these queries compared to their e-commerce queries that peripheral content accounted for a majority of Google’s traffic. I’ll share more about Navboost soon, but Google’s measurement of user engagement signals had to be done primarily based on peripheral content versus e-commerce content. Although Navboost is just one factor among several, it is an important factor and that was (in my opinion) not a good thing for this website.
Below you can see the editorial content that dominates from Google’s traffic perspective. The solid blue line represents traffic to editorial content and the dashed line represents traffic to other areas of the site (including e-commerce):
In addition to content written primarily for search, they also published some content based on studies and surveys they conducted. The studies weren’t really directly connected to the core business either. They were often fun and could raise eyebrows on these issues, but they wouldn’t help any potential customer. In fact, some of these studies generated so much attention that the blog posts often received strong links. And I mean links from some of the best news publishers in the world. The site owner would often find themselves on a “link high” when they saw these powerful links, giving them a false sense of security that everything was fine when it came to SEO. More about the links soon.
Here are some examples of the domains that reference the studies:
And I mentioned that the core e-commerce part of the site also had content issues. Overall it was a strong eCommerce setup from an SEO perspective, but a few things had crept up since I last helped them. And then there was the content in the fluff category, which I always mentioned was unnecessary. You can read my case study on removing inappropriate eCommerce descriptions to see how another client of mine ultimately achieved better performance AFTER removing all the content.
But back to this page. That vague content on the category pages definitely wasn’t helpful to users, it was there for search, and there was quite a bit of it… Additionally, the category pages provided over-optimized blurbs for each product. It wasn’t terrible, but in my opinion it was definitely overkill just based on the amount of products listed per page. However, these issues only affected the category pages. The product pages were fine and had no content issues.
The misleading traffic flow before an algorithm strikes.
Can you understand why the site owner had a hard time figuring out how to handle the content? Sure, there were mixed signals about the quality and relevance of the content, but it ranked like crazy and received some extremely powerful links. With that in mind, I think the Fall 2023 decline highlights the diminishing power of links over time. When a site is as strong as this site with links from some of the top publishers in the world, then it’s pretty clear that those links no longer hold as much power.
It also highlights the point that there are other systems that counterbalance the systems that evaluate connection signals. You can read my post about the transition from HCU to Core to learn more about the counterbalance of systems in Google’s Core ranking system.
The image below is a good way to think about the different systems that make up Google’s core ranking system. For example, system 065 may balance the performance of systems 214 and 129.
Google HCU(X) + October 2023 comprehensive core update: A deadly double whammy.
The site was attacked in the fall of 2023. And it wasn’t just one update that impacted the site, but several. And beyond that there were several Types of algorithm updates that have impacted the website. With the major core update in August, the site saw a decline for the first time, but mostly in the e-commerce section of the site. The marginal editorial content has not decreased at all. It’s also worth noting that the site has seen a lot Volatility in July 2023 when we saw a series of unconfirmed updates (which could well be a test of the fall updates).
Between the drop in July and August, clicks fell by 20%. You can see the first July drop below and more with the August Core Update.
The second, larger decline was due to September’s helpful content update (HCUX), where the aforementioned editorial fringe content saw a significant decline. However, because the HCU(X) classifier is site-level, rankings also dropped across the site, including the core e-commerce site. And that was extremely scary for the website owner.
Then, not long after the launch of HCU(X), the site experienced a major decline with the major core update in October 2023. The drop in rankings affected all searches on the site. What I’ve seen in drips is pretty standard with the HCU(X) and major core updates. There was the HCU classifier applied with site-level suppression, and then there are site-level quality algorithms with extensive core updates that can have a big impact on rankings. This combination was fatal for the site. Between several confirmed updates and July’s unconfirmed update, the site is down 41% in fall 2023.
First, here’s the drop in eCommerce content from the October core update:
And here is the drop for the editorial section of the website:
And when you add it all up, here’s the overall decline for the site when all types of content are taken into account. Again, the site was down 41% since July 2023:
It’s also worth noting that my client ran into some very strange issues with Google Ads that prevented them from providing air support while organic traffic dropped. They suffered a huge drop in rankings due to major algorithm updates, but also had problems with advertising, which seemed to be more on Google’s side than theirs. Needless to say, it was incredibly frustrating for her. You can see the problems starting in July 2023 and lasting until the fall.
Difficult analysis, difficult decisions
Based on the impact, history of the site, peripheral content, etc., it was pretty clear what the core issues with the site were. It was this fringe content that made its way into HCU(X) land, and perhaps this HCU(X) classifier contributed to the continued decline during October’s major core update.
And that’s a shame because the content didn’t really help the business at all. It simply generated a lot of traffic over time and generated some strong links, but it didn’t help or support potential customers in any way. Even from a conversion perspective, it had no impact at all. No one looking for this information would actually be a potential customer. Sure, the content earned links, but now it was killing the site.
The site owner was clearly in a difficult position. Could they improve and improve this content? Should they just put a stake in the ground, destroy it with nuclear weapons and take the right path substantively? Or should they just wait and hope for a miraculous recovery? These were tough questions that the site owner had to answer, along with my guidance from an SEO perspective.
“Goin’ legit!”: Complete disconnection from the marginal editorial content and destruction of the over-optimized e-commerce content.
I received an email from my client basically stating that he had had enough of fringe content like this. He explained that he wanted to have the best website possible, one that he could proudly point to and say to any Google search engineer: “SEE THIS SHOULD RANK!”
So they were “legal,” wanted to get rid of that editorial fringe content, deal with the over-optimized e-commerce content, and move forward with the best e-commerce site possible.
“Farewell and goodbye… to you, fair, strong links” – big changes, big shifts and quick action
Over the next few days, I received a series of emails from my client as his team worked through all of the side content. They decided what to keep, what to reinforce, and what to nuke. Several times I received questions about how I could keep some of the links but still destroy the content. Hey, they had to try to maintain those links… but in several situations they failed. I explained their options and they decided when to redirect URLs to highly relevant content, when to noindex instead of 404, and when removing all content would be the best option. Long story short: some of these links had to be destroyed.
Radically fixing a serious problem often requires major changes. And my client has made some big changes in improving the website. After a thorough analysis of all editorial content on the site (some of which was years old), they ended up removing 38% of their editorial content in one fell swoop. Yes, they almost dropped a nuclear bomb 40% their editorial content.
My client found that content was written for search, didn’t support the business at all, and wasn’t driving conversions at all. Sure, it deserved links, but other Google systems and algorithms clearly did Counterweight the power of these links and resulted in a sharp drop in rankings when these calculations were completed.
It is also important to understand that since it is an eCommerce website, much of the indexed content was in the eCommerce section of the site. So even removing 40% of the editorial content was a relatively small number of URLs overall. But even the small percentage of content accounted for a large portion of Google’s traffic. So from a user interaction signals perspective, a large percentage of this data was evaluated by Google. So my client wanted to flip the script here.
This content removal resulted in another sharp drop in traffic as the remaining clicks on this fringe content disappeared. Again, it is important to understand that this traffic occurred no effect on the business in general. Therefore, the third decline was not as scary as the fall of 2023, which also impacted key e-commerce requests. And those core e-commerce queries drove a lot of sales. However, be prepared for the following GSC graphic.
The March 2024 core update is here. Take out the popcorn.
My customer made major changes in late 2023, about two months after the core update was completed in October. I explained to my client that he should view the changes as a long-term move and that he could definitely see some strange volatility in the short term. And then when Google re-evaluated the site overall, they hopefully saw improvements in terms of ranking (for their top ecommerce queries, remaining editorial content, etc.).
As we reached 2024 in Google Land, everyone was waiting for a major algorithm update. And a BIG UPDATE we finally received it. On March 5, 2024, Google introduced this March 2024 core update. And it was a major update aimed at reducing the amount of spam and unhelpful content in search results by 40%. It started with a spammy update and included thousands of manual actions for “scaled content abuse” and “expired domain abuse.” And then the March core update went into full swing when it finally “landed” a few days later. Google wasn’t messing around.
To add to the complexity of March’s core update, Google said it has integrated its helpful content system into its core ranking system. This was a big step considering how devastating September’s HCU(X) was for niche publishers. The March core update was one of the longest and most complex core updates Google has ever released. It took 45 days (or 53…) to complete, but who’s counting?
Google explained that website owners may experience greater fluctuations (more than usual) during the update as multiple core systems are being updated and will reinforce each other. I detailed what I saw during the update in my “Good Morning Google Land!” tweets every day. Needless to say, it was a huge update, with some sites seeing a big increase or a big drop.
OMG, it works, and fast:
As soon as the March core update started to show, my customer started to grow. It was great to see. Top e-commerce keywords rebounded strongly. I set up ranking tracking for the client to monitor a few hundred of their top searches, just as a barometer to understand how the site is performing over time. And it was clear that things were looking good at the start of the update… Then the GSC data started filling in and you could see the increase in traffic, rankings, etc.
Here is GSC data for the e-commerce portion of the site, which is ramping up with the March core update:
It’s worth noting that I thought this would be a quick recovery in my opinion. My client made major changes in late 2023, so after years of providing this editorial content, Google actually only needed a few months of data to analyze. Additionally, a number of effective links were removed when the side content was removed, so I assumed this would have some impact on the site as well.
Hold your applause. The first big earthquake is coming…
As I suspected based on Google’s explanation of the update and the jitters noted in previous updates, the core update’s first jitter occurred in March. And it was a big problem that led to some serious setbacks across locations. For example, some locations that began to rise reversed course and fell. And then some locations fell sharply, reversed course and recovered. For website owners, this was either completely frustrating or astonishing, depending on which side of the equation you were on.
And as you can imagine, my client changed course and began to fall back down. Again, rank tracking was the first sign that something was happening. See below.
Then the GSC data was populated and you could see the decline:
OK, we knew this was possible based on Google’s explanations… It wasn’t easy to endure, but the update wasn’t ready yet. My customer was really taken aback, but I told him to hang in there as more systems needed to be updated during the core update in March.
About 15 days later, on April 14th, we saw the next big quake. And again it was a big quake that led to further reversals… And for my client this was a welcome change. They started swimming back again! My customer was thrilled. Here is the second tremor via rank tracking.
And again the GSC data was populated and you could see the increase in clicks again:
And my client put it perfectly from the site owner perspective:“I feel like I’m in Las Vegas! This is all very exciting…”
And the more time passed after that tremor, the more clients I got. It was amazing to see again.
Vegas is a perfect analogy.
Similar to the first tremor and reversal, I told my client to do it not celebrate. The update is ongoing and additional systems may be updated, which could result in more volatility. Now is a good time to mention that we all thought the update would continue until early May, but in reality the March core update was completed on April 19th (but Google simply didn’t announce it back then).
So May 3rd was just around the corner and from an update perspective it was a big day. There was a big change that impacted many sites previously affected by the March core update. And yes, that meant more reversals. I shared about 5/3 strong on X where I showed examples of sites reversing course.
And can you guess what happened to my client? Yes, they reversed AGAIN. This time they revert back to how they were before the update began. Speaking of rollercoaster rides… As I’ve said many times in posts and presentations about major algorithm updates: “Welcome to Google Land!” 🙂 Here’s the rank tracking again, showing the third reversal.
And here is the GSC data showing the decline:
So how could this happen outside of a major core update? Well, I’ve been describing for years how Google could decouple algorithms from major core updates and run them separately. Google’s Paul Haahr explained this to me during the 2019 Google Webmaster Conference in Mountain View. I think we’ve seen this several times over the last few years, and the 5/3 move could very well have been that. Again, a number of sites that were heavily impacted by the March core update saw moves, including some complete reversals. Some rose again after the fall or vice versa.
Here’s a great (confirmed) example of this:
But the roller coaster ride isn’t over yet! How about another increase? OMG.
This case study was supposed to end with that decline on May 3rd and how things have gotten worse since then, but Google wasn’t willing to end the story there… Yes, with the recent volatility on 5/26. the website is booming back again. The first signs were with rank tracking. Check out the increase on 5/26. to.
Here’s the full rank tracking story before the core update begins in March.
And here is GSC data based on the 5/26 quake:
And if you’ve been reading my blog posts for a while, this yo-yo trend might sound familiar to you. In previous posts about Google’s rating updates, I’ve covered some sites that were clearly in the gray area, rising and falling like crazy over time (both during and outside of the rating updates). For example, the screenshot below shows one of these cases. As you can imagine, the site owner lost his mind as the site rose and fell like crazy.
I just wanted to give these wild examples of review sites (there were several) as they are eerily similar to what’s going on here with this site. Before I end this article, I will briefly discuss balancing systems again. In my opinion, it is an important topic that website owners should fully understand.
Balancing systems with major core updates and hoping for the next major core update:
Needless to say, we were very excited about the recent surge. However, the site is clearly currently in the gray area of Google’s algorithms, so we really have no idea if it will stay that way. Keep in mind that my client had just made major changes a few months before the core update was rolled out in March. This is after years of fringe content being there…
But while I believe the site is currently in the gray area of Google algorithms, they have increased significantly (several times) since the core update was rolled out in March. I think this is a good sign and it seems that several systems are relatively happy with the site. And then of course some other systems offset those results and drag the site back down. But for now, here we go again.
We also know that Google is actively reviewing a lot of feedback based on the March core update, and they have stated that sites affected by September’s HCU(X) may see more movement with the next major core update, so am I confident my client. They’re doing a really good job of improving the site overall (including the e-commerce side and the editorial side).
Moving on: Keep moving forward on the quality front.
As I explained, I’m hoping for the next major core update for my client. Overall, the site offers a solid e-commerce experience with much stronger editorial content overall. The peripheral content has been completely removed and they are starting to publish more editorial content that supports the company and its potential customers.
Time will tell how they perform in the long run, but one thing is for sure: I highly doubt they will ever go down the route of writing content based on query volume again… As I explained, my client wants to have a website that does this. You could point this out to any search engineer and say: “See, this should rank!” And I think they’re close to having this website.
I will provide an update on site performance over time, particularly after the next major core update. In this regard, I’m hoping for a big, comprehensive core update in the summer. Based on the feedback Google received after the March core update, I think we could see some big changes with the next core update (and hopefully for sites heavily impacted by September’s helpful content update). Stay tuned.
GG