The correlation studies started appearing around 2012. Longer content ranks higher, they claimed. The average first-page result contains 1,890 words. Comprehensive content wins.
These studies were not wrong about the correlation. They were wrong about the causation. Long content did not rank because it was long. Long content ranked because the type of queries studied rewarded comprehensive coverage, and comprehensive coverage naturally requires more words.
When a Nashville HVAC company asks whether their 300-word service pages should become 2,000-word guides, the honest answer is: probably not. When a B2B software company asks whether their technical documentation should be expanded, the answer is more nuanced. Length follows from purpose, not the reverse.
This guide unpacks the research behind content length recommendations, explains what the data actually shows, and provides a framework for determining appropriate length for your specific content types.
What the Studies Actually Found
Backlinko’s often-cited study analyzed 11.8 million Google search results and found the average first-page result contained 1,447 words. Similar studies from Moz, SEMrush, and others found comparable numbers, typically between 1,200 and 2,000 words for top-ranking content.
The methodology matters here. These studies analyzed informational queries where searchers wanted thorough explanations: how-to guides, comparison articles, definition pieces. They excluded transactional queries, navigational queries, and local queries where length patterns differ dramatically.
When you search “what is quantum computing,” top results need significant length to answer properly. When you search “pizza delivery near me,” the top result might be a Google Business Profile with zero traditional content. Averaging these together produces meaningless statistics.
The studies also measured correlation, not causation. Long content tends to have more keywords, more comprehensive topic coverage, more internal links, and more external backlinks. Any of these factors could drive rankings independently of length itself.
Subsequent research from Ahrefs examined whether adding length to existing content improved rankings. Their finding: adding words without adding value did not help. Pages that expanded coverage of subtopics they previously missed saw improvement. Pages that padded existing sections with fluff saw nothing.
Intent Determines Appropriate Length
Search intent creates natural length requirements. Someone searching “how to tie a tie” needs visual instructions, not a 3,000-word exploration of necktie history. Someone searching “complete guide to machine learning” expects substantial depth.
Four intent categories demand different length approaches:
Navigational intent: Users want to reach a specific destination. Amazon’s homepage, your login page, a brand’s contact information. These pages need minimal content because users already know what they want.
Transactional intent: Users want to complete an action. Product pages, checkout flows, sign-up forms. Length should serve conversion, which often means concise, scannable information rather than lengthy explanations.
Informational intent: Users want to learn something. This category shows the widest length variation based on topic complexity. “What time is it in Tokyo” needs one sentence. “How to start a business” could justify an entire book.
Commercial investigation: Users compare options before purchasing. Comparison articles, review roundups, versus posts. Length depends on how many options exist and how much differentiation matters to the decision.
A local service business targeting “plumber Nashville TN” faces different length requirements than a SaaS company targeting “project management software comparison.” The plumber needs enough content to establish expertise and service area, perhaps 500-800 words. The SaaS comparison needs enough depth to evaluate multiple options thoroughly, likely 2,500 words or more.
Competitive Context Shapes Targets
Analyzing what currently ranks reveals what search engines consider appropriate for a given query. If top results for your target keyword all fall between 1,500-2,000 words, writing 5,000 words signals misunderstanding of user needs rather than comprehensiveness.
Pull the top ten results for your primary keyword. Note their word counts. More importantly, note their structure. What sections do they include? What questions do they answer? Where do they stop?
The goal is not matching the average word count. The goal is understanding what level of coverage users and search engines expect. Sometimes you will write more because you cover the topic more thoroughly. Sometimes you will write less because you cover it more efficiently.
A content strategist in our network tested this on 40 articles across different industries. Articles matching the top-results average length plus or minus 20% performed best on initial rankings. Articles dramatically longer or shorter took more time to find their ranking position, eventually settling based on engagement metrics rather than length alone.
When Shorter Content Wins
Several content types perform better with brevity:
Reference content: Definitions, specifications, quick answers. “How many ounces in a cup” gets a featured snippet with one number. Expanding that to 1,000 words would frustrate users.
Local service pages: Someone searching for an emergency plumber does not want to read an essay. They want phone number, service area, and availability. Three hundred focused words outperform 1,500 words of filler.
News and updates: Announcements, product updates, industry news. Readers want the information quickly. Excessive length signals padding.
Highly specific queries: Long-tail searches often have simple answers. “Nashville sales tax rate” needs a number and brief context, not a comprehensive tax guide.
Mobile-first content: When most of your audience reads on phones, lengthy content creates friction. Articles consumed primarily on mobile benefit from tighter editing.
The test for appropriate brevity: if you removed 30% of the content, would anything valuable disappear? If the remaining 70% covers the topic fully, the original 30% was padding.
When Longer Content Wins
Certain content types reward depth:
Comprehensive guides: Topics with multiple facets benefit from thorough coverage. A guide to starting a podcast could reasonably cover equipment, software, recording technique, editing, distribution, monetization, and growth strategies.
Technical documentation: Complex processes, detailed procedures, and reference materials need completeness over conciseness. Missing steps or incomplete explanations create user frustration.
Comparison content: Evaluating multiple options requires space. A comparison of five CRM platforms covering features, pricing, integrations, and use cases cannot be done well in 800 words.
Thought leadership: Original analysis, unique perspectives, and expert commentary benefit from development space. Shallow thought leadership undermines credibility.
Pillar content: Hub pages designed to comprehensively cover a topic and link to cluster content naturally require significant length to establish authority.
The test for appropriate length: if you added another 500 words, would it provide new value or repeat what you have already said? If there is genuinely more to cover, more length is justified. If you would be padding, stop.
The Quality vs. Quantity Tradeoff
Every additional sentence either adds value or dilutes value. There is no neutral ground. Words that inform, persuade, or entertain contribute positively. Words that restate, pad, or fill space contribute negatively.
Identifying filler is straightforward. Read your content aloud. Sentences that feel awkward, repetitive, or unnecessary when spoken indicate filler. Transitions that restate the previous paragraph, introductions to sections that preview what you are about to say, conclusions that summarize what you just said without adding insight: these are filler.
Consider this example of padding versus substance:
Padded version: Content length is an important consideration that many content creators think about when creating content. In this section, we will explore the topic of content length and discuss why it matters for your content strategy. Content length can impact your SEO in various ways.
Substantive version: Content length affects user engagement, dwell time, and comprehensive coverage of topics. Each factor influences ranking signals differently.
The first version uses 57 words to say nothing. The second uses 21 words to make a specific claim. Three substantive sentences beat ten fluffy ones.
This principle applies at every scale. A 500-word article packed with useful information outperforms a 2,000-word article stretched thin. The page that best serves user intent wins regardless of length.
Methodology for Determining Length
When planning content, follow this process:
Step 1: Analyze search intent. What does someone searching this term actually want? A quick answer, a comprehensive resource, a comparison, or something else entirely?
Step 2: Study current rankings. What length and depth do top results provide? What sections do they cover? What questions do they answer?
Step 3: Identify gaps. What do current results miss? Where could you provide more value? Gaps might be uncovered subtopics, missing examples, or better explanations.
Step 4: Outline first. Before writing, outline every section you plan to cover. If your outline contains genuine subtopics requiring coverage, length will be justified. If your outline shows one idea stretched across many sections, you are padding.
Step 5: Write to completion. Cover each outlined topic thoroughly but concisely. Do not target a word count. Target complete coverage.
Step 6: Edit mercilessly. After writing, review for filler. Cut transitions that restate, introductions that preview, and conclusions that summarize without insight. Your goal is the shortest version that fully serves user intent.
Updating Content: Adding Length
Historical optimization sometimes involves adding length to existing content. The decision should follow specific criteria:
Add length when: New information has emerged since publication, you missed subtopics that competitors cover, user behavior data shows people searching for related topics you do not address, or you can include original research or examples you did not have initially.
Do not add length when: You simply want more words, competitors have longer content but not better content, you would be restating existing points in different words, or the content already fully serves user intent.
A Nashville marketing agency ran an experiment updating 50 articles. Twenty-five received content expansion adding 500-1,000 words covering new subtopics. Twenty-five received only freshness updates: current statistics, updated examples, refreshed links. Both groups improved in traffic, but not significantly differently from each other. The lesson: freshness and relevance mattered more than raw length.
When adding to existing content, integrate additions naturally. New sections should feel like original parts of the article, not bolted-on appendices. If new content does not flow with existing content, the article may need restructuring rather than expansion.
Industry-Specific Considerations
Different industries show different length patterns due to audience expectations and topic complexity:
B2B technology: Longer content performs well because decision-makers research thoroughly before purchasing. Whitepapers, detailed guides, and comprehensive comparisons align with the buying process.
Local services: Shorter content performs well because users want quick information about availability, service area, and contact details. Trust signals matter more than word count.
E-commerce: Product descriptions benefit from enough detail to answer purchase questions without overwhelming buyers. Reviews and comparison content can go longer; individual product pages generally should not.
Healthcare: Accuracy and comprehensiveness matter more than brevity. Medical content often requires longer length to cover symptoms, causes, treatments, and when to seek care properly.
Finance: Similar to healthcare in complexity requirements. Financial topics demand thorough explanation to serve users making important decisions.
Know your industry’s norms but do not blindly follow them. A short, focused article that answers the question better than competitors’ lengthy guides still wins.
Measuring Success Beyond Length
Traffic and rankings provide incomplete pictures. Engagement metrics reveal whether your content length serves users:
Average time on page: Longer content should produce longer time on page if users are reading. Similar time on page for longer content suggests users are not consuming all of it.
Scroll depth: Analytics tools can track how far users scroll. If 80% of visitors never reach your third section, those sections may not be providing value.
Bounce rate in context: High bounce rate on a comprehensive guide suggests length overwhelmed users. High bounce rate on a quick answer page might just mean users found what they needed.
Conversion rate: For commercial content, does longer or shorter content convert better? Test and measure rather than assume.
Return visits: Content that brings users back provides ongoing value. This can indicate appropriate depth for your audience.
The optimal length for any piece of content is the length that best serves your specific audience searching for your specific topic. That number varies by query, by industry, by content type, and by competitive context. Studies showing average word counts provide reference points, not targets.
Write to fully answer the question. Then stop.
Sources
- Backlinko: “We Analyzed 11.8 Million Google Search Results” study (https://backlinko.com/search-engine-ranking)
- Ahrefs: “How Long Should Blog Posts Be?” analysis of content length and rankings (https://ahrefs.com/blog/blog-post-length/)
- Search Engine Journal: “Does Word Count Matter for SEO?” expert analysis (https://www.searchenginejournal.com/word-count-seo/)
Research referenced spans 2020-2025. Content length correlations remain consistent in direction but specific numbers vary by study methodology and query types analyzed.