Keyword Difficulty Assessment: Setting Realistic Targets

What the Scores Measure

Two tool vendors describe their own scores:

• Ahrefs notes that almost every keyword research tool has a difficulty score and that these tools “all use the same 0-100 scale, but each one calculates it differently”, then describes its own method: “We pull the top 10 ranking pages for your keyword and look up how many websites link to each of them. The more links the top-ranking pages for your keyword have, the higher its KD score.” (Ahrefs on keyword difficulty)
• Semrush says its score “measures the SEO effort it would take for your content to rank organically in the top 10 results on Google”, based on factors “such as the median number of referring domains pointing to the URLs that are ranking, the median ratio of dofollow/nofollow links pointing to these, the median authority score of the domains that are ranking, and the SERP-related qualities of the keyword itself.” (Semrush on keyword difficulty)

So the scores are largely about the links behind the pages that rank now. They don’t measure whether those pages answer the query well, and they can’t know your site.

Why a Score Alone Misleads

• Different tools, different numbers. The same query can score very differently in two tools. Compare within one tool only.
• Links aren’t the whole picture. A results page full of weak, outdated answers can carry a high link-based score, while a page dominated by strong specialist content can score lower than it is to beat.
• The score is the same for every site. It can’t account for your site’s existing standing in a topic, which changes what’s realistic.
• It ignores what the results page shows. An AI Overview, a local pack, shopping results or video results change how many searchers reach the organic listings. Google says AI Overviews “are only shown when our systems determine that it is additive to classic Search, and as such, often don’t trigger”, so whether one appears for a query is something to check, not assume.

What to Check Beyond the Score

Open the results page for the query and note:

• Who ranks. Major brands, government and reference sites, specialist publishers, small businesses, forums. A page of large brands for a commercial query can be harder than the same score with small sites ranking.
• How well they answer. Depth, accuracy, currency, format. Weak answers are an opening; strong ones raise the bar.
• Intent fit. Whether the ranking pages are the kind of page you’d create; see search intent.
• SERP features that take attention above the organic results.
• Freshness. Whether recent pages dominate, which means you’ll need to keep the page current.

Compare Against Your Own Site

Difficulty is relative to the site attempting it. Questions that adjust the score for you:

• Topic standing. Do you already rank for related queries? Search Console’s Performance report shows the queries your pages appear for; a site with many related pages ranking has a shorter path than one starting the topic from nothing.
• Links to comparable pages. How do your best pages in this topic compare with the ranking pages on links from other sites?
• Existing assets. Is there a page to improve, or does this need a new one?
• Expertise. Can you add first-hand experience, data or credentials the ranking pages lack? That is the input links-based scores can’t see; see E-E-A-T explained.

Estimate the Effort

For each target, write down what a competitive page would need:

High-effort targets aren’t wrong, but they should be chosen deliberately, with the resources to finish them.

Setting Targets

Group your target list into three bands, by your own judgment from the checks above:

• Near-term: queries where you already have standing, the results page has beatable answers, and the work is mostly improving an existing page.
• Medium-term: queries in topics you’re building, where a strong new page plus internal links can compete.
• Long-term: queries where large sites with strong links dominate; worth pursuing only as part of building a whole topic, not as a single page.

Avoid fixed timelines. How long rankings take depends on the site, the competition and how often Google recrawls and reassesses the pages; a timeline written into a plan should be a review date, not a promise. A mix across the three bands can give early results while longer work builds, and how to prioritize in general is covered in SEO prioritization.

A Practical Workflow

1. Export the candidate list with volume and difficulty from one tool.
2. Filter out queries outside your offer or with intent you can’t serve.
3. Check the results page for each remaining query, with the date recorded.
4. Score each on business value, your standing in the topic and the quality of what ranks.
5. Assign a band and an owner page, using your keyword clustering map so one page targets a group of related queries.
6. Review when Search Console shows movement or the results page changes.

When a Low Score Is Still Hard

• Strong, current answers rank, with few links but excellent content.
• The results page is mostly features, leaving few clicks for organic results.
• Specialist sites or official sources dominate a YMYL topic, where demonstrated expertise matters; see YMYL pages.
• Local results for a query where your business has no presence in the area.

And the reverse: a high score can hide an opening when the ranking pages are old, thin or off-intent. The results page decides, not the number.

When a low-scoring query’s results page is full of strong, current answers or features, move it down a band; when a high-scoring one shows old, thin or off-intent pages, move it up, and note the date you looked.