-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 741
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Search quantity (this probably came up before, no hate pls) #225
Comments
As far as I know its not possible. Only the search engine providers do have the exact logs of the searches occurring. I suspect you can infer the search quantities for certain keywords yourself with different methods and estimations, but you simply cannot know because you don't have the data the provider has. |
If you are interested, there is a pretty dope chrome extension I use. It has been running under the name "Keyword Research Tool" or somelike that for a while, now it is renamed to "keywordkeg.com" if I'm getting it right. I highly doubt that it provides very accurate estimations but at least it does something. This is certainly a fascinating topic, and it tells a lot about how Google is always playing the good boy of the industry and throwing away free stuff all the time, but at the same time keeping the most valuable data on planet Earth. The amount of intel you can get from keyword quantities is basically endless, from business, political, social, science, technology and all kinds of other perspectives. |
Breaking: according to this website, Google actually releases this data through API.
https://keywordseverywhere.com/frequently-asked-questions.html#WhatIsKeywordsEverywhere |
Is there a realiable way to determine how many times people are searching for certain keywords? Is it possible in this project to create a new feature like that?
Please note the I'm aware of search quantity analysis being a highly demanded and hardly implemented feature of related software solutions. I intended to start a positive, open discussion, since I haven't found anything about this, neither in past issues, nor in documentation.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: