SEO Competitor Analysis:
A Step-by-Step Guide

SEO competitor analysis compares the websites ranking for your target searches, including their keywords, content, backlinks, and technical performance. Use the findings to choose which pages to improve, which topics to cover, and which obstacles to fix.

Keep each finding tied to a search query and a URL. The final deliverable should identify the gap, the action to take, and the evidence used to prioritize it. The process below covers competitor discovery, keyword research, page comparison, backlinks, technical checks, and measurement.

1. Define the queries and market#

Choose the country, language, device, and section of the site being analyzed. Google explains that relevance can depend on a searcher’s location, language, and device. Record these settings with the observation date, and use matching settings in your research tools wherever available.

Build an initial query list from the products, services, or information the site provides. Include searches for learning, comparing options, and completing an action, then separate them by purpose. Keep branded searches distinct from general topic searches.

Establish the site’s current visibility using Search Console’s Performance report. Sort the Queries tab by impressions and clicks. Select a relevant query and open the Pages tab to see which URLs Google displayed. Record clicks, impressions, click-through rate (CTR), and average position for the relevant pages and query groups.

Check the site’s existing content alongside that data. Google documents that some queries are omitted for privacy and reporting limits, so a missing query row cannot establish that a page never appeared for that search.

2. Identify the competitors in search results#

SEO competitors are the sites competing for the searches being analyzed. They may differ from direct business competitors: the relevant result can belong to a publisher, marketplace, directory, or another provider.

Search the priority queries and record recurring domains together with their ranking pages. Build separate competitor lists for query groups with different purposes. Keep a site on the shortlist when its pages overlap with the subjects and searches the analysis covers.

For automated discovery, enter the domain in Semrush Organic Rankings and open the Competitors tab. Its suggestions are based on shared organic keyword rankings. Verify the suggested sites against the actual queries and pages before including them.

For every shortlisted competitor, record the domain, relevant section, overlapping query groups, and URLs worth examining. This gives the later keyword and page comparisons a defined scope.

3. Find keyword gaps and the pages behind them#

Enter your domain and the shortlisted competitors in Semrush Keyword Gap, select organic keywords, and choose the target regional database. Its main gap categories describe different relationships:

Filter out unrelated topics and competitor brand queries that the site has no reason to address. Group closely related terms by the answer or action they require. For each group, attach the competing URLs and the most relevant existing URL on your site.

Narrow the comparison when a competitor covers many unrelated subjects. Semrush Organic Rankings can analyze a domain, subdomain, subfolder, or exact URL and reports estimated organic traffic. Use those estimates to locate candidate pages; label them as estimates in the analysis.

Use search volume and difficulty as screening measures. Ahrefs explains that search volume is estimated and does not directly translate into traffic. Its Keyword Difficulty calculation uses referring domains to the top ten organic results and excludes on-page SEO factors. Keep the provider and market attached to both metrics, and inspect the competing pages before deciding what to pursue.

The output of this step is a set of relevant query groups mapped to pages. Assign each group a provisional action: improve an existing page, investigate a new page, or leave it outside the current scope.

4. Compare search intent, content, and on-page details#

Open several competing results for each priority query. Record what each page lets the visitor learn, evaluate, or do. Then compare that task with the page your site currently provides.

Use the same checklist for each page:

Write down specific observations from the pages being reviewed. Identify an unanswered question, an unsupported claim, an outdated detail, or a missing asset before proposing an improvement. Include titles, headings, descriptions, and internal navigation in the comparison, without treating another page’s wording as a required template.

Google’s content quality guidance asks whether content provides original information or analysis and adds substantial value when drawing on other sources. Use that test when writing the content brief: state the answer to deliver and the evidence or material available to support it.

Update an existing page when it already serves the intended task. Create a separate page when the query group calls for a distinct answer that the current page cannot coherently provide. Group similar keywords into one brief when they require the same answer; verify that choice by inspecting their search results.

5. Review backlinks to the competing pages#

Compare links to the relevant ranking URLs as well as the wider domains. Ahrefs’ documented Link Intersect workflow finds sites linking to competitors but not to the target site. Use it to discover referring pages that warrant closer inspection.

Open each promising referring page. Record the linked URL, the surrounding text, the subject of the referring site, and the resource being cited. Distinguish references to useful material from unrelated mentions or links that do not fit your subject.

Identify what would make your own page a suitable reference: original research, a usable tool, a clear explanation, or another resource supported by the site’s expertise. Keep that resource requirement in the action plan alongside any proposed outreach.

Google’s link-spam policy lists buying links for ranking purposes and automatically creating links as spam practices. Restrict recommendations to relevant resources and legitimate editorial references. Record backlink differences as observations; avoid assigning a ranking gain to a particular link without evidence.

6. Check indexing and page experience#

Use Search Console’s URL Inspection tool on your own candidate URLs to examine indexing status, crawl information, and the Google-selected canonical. The indexed report and live test serve different purposes; the live test cannot predict Google’s canonical selection or guarantee indexing.

Resolve an unintended indexing block or access problem before commissioning a major content expansion. Keep this check focused on the pages under consideration; a full technical audit is a separate project.

Compare relevant pages with PageSpeed Insights. Separate field data, which reflects real user experience, from lab data collected under controlled conditions. Check whether the field data applies to the individual URL or the whole origin: reporting can fall back to the origin when the URL lacks sufficient data. An unavailable field report is not a performance score.

Inspect the mobile layout, navigation, and access to the main content as well. Google’s page experience guidance includes mobile display and intrusive interruptions, and states that good Core Web Vitals results do not guarantee top rankings. Describe the actual usability or performance issue to fix rather than prescribing a perfect score as the objective.

7. Prioritize actions and record the decision#

Assess each candidate against four questions: Does the search fit the site’s purpose? Is there a specific shortcoming in the current answer? Can the site supply a useful improvement with supporting evidence? How much work and maintenance will it require?

Use this practical order: fix access or indexing problems on important pages, improve relevant existing pages with identifiable gaps, then consider new pages with a clear purpose. Evaluate new resources for earning editorial references alongside the content work they require. Adjust that order when the site’s evidence or constraints justify it.

Keep estimates beside the recommendation, with their source and settings. Do not let a volume or difficulty threshold replace the page review. Mark unavailable data as unknown and make the next research action explicit.

Use one row per query group in the working sheet:

This sheet is the analysis deliverable. Select work that can be specified clearly enough to implement, and keep unresolved candidates in research until the missing evidence is available.

8. Measure the changes with your own data#

After making a change, compare the same query groups and URLs across comparable periods in Search Console’s Performance report. Keep market and device filters consistent. Review impressions, clicks, CTR, and average position together, then inspect the results again where performance differs from expectations.

Use the site’s own analytics to assess relevant completed actions, such as purchases, enquiries, or downloads. Keep those measurements separate from third-party estimates of a competitor’s traffic.

Google notes that other events can also contribute to performance changes, including changes in demand and improvements to competing sites. Record the implementation date and other relevant changes so a before-and-after comparison retains that context.

Refresh the competing URLs and search results when making the next content decision. Keep the same comparison settings where possible and note any changes to them, so the next review can distinguish a new opportunity from a different dataset.

Frequently asked questions#