That keyword tool says difficulty is 45. Is that good? Bad? Achievable for your site? The number alone tells you almost nothing useful. It’s a single score attempting to compress a complex competitive reality into an integer. Every SEO has learned the hard way that a “low difficulty” keyword remained out of reach while a “high difficulty” one was surprisingly winnable.
Difficulty scores provide a starting point, not an answer. Real assessment requires understanding what those scores measure, what they miss, and how to evaluate keywords relative to your specific site’s capabilities.
What Keyword Difficulty Scores Actually Measure
Different tools calculate difficulty differently, but most rely heavily on backlink profiles of ranking pages.
Ahrefs KD estimates how many referring domains you’d need to rank in the top 10. It analyzes the backlink profiles of current top 10 results and produces a 0-100 score.
Semrush KD uses a similar backlink-focused approach, weighing authority metrics of ranking pages.
Moz KD incorporates its proprietary Page Authority and Domain Authority scores of ranking results.
These scores share a fundamental limitation: they primarily measure link-based competition. A score of 30 means the current ranking pages have moderate backlink profiles. It doesn’t measure:
- Content quality or comprehensiveness
- Brand authority or recognition in the space
- Topical relevance of your existing site
- SERP features that reduce organic opportunity
- User engagement signals that might favor incumbents
- How long the ranking pages have held their positions
A keyword might show low difficulty because ranking pages have few backlinks, yet those pages might rank due to brand authority, excellent content, or Google’s assessment of their expertise that links alone don’t capture.
Why Tool Scores Mislead
Tools measure different things. A keyword scoring 35 in Ahrefs might score 55 in Semrush and 42 in Moz. They’re not measuring the same dimension identically.
Scores don’t account for your domain. A difficulty of 40 is hard for a new site with no authority. It’s easy for an established site with topical relevance. The same score means different things depending on who’s asking.
Scores can’t measure content gaps. If every ranking page has mediocre content on a topic you can comprehensively cover, the true difficulty is lower than the score suggests. Conversely, if ranking content is exceptional, difficulty is higher regardless of their backlink profiles.
SERP features change the game. A keyword with a featured snippet, knowledge panel, and four ads has less organic opportunity than raw difficulty implies. Some searches result in zero clicks to organic results.
Local and personalized results add variance. What ranks varies by location and search history. A single difficulty score flattens this complexity.
Scores lag reality. The SERP you’re measuring today might not be the SERP when your content ranks. Competitors publish, algorithms update, and the competitive set shifts.
Use difficulty scores to quickly filter obviously impossible keywords and identify obviously achievable ones. For everything in between, deeper analysis is necessary.
Factors Beyond the Score
Real keyword difficulty emerges from multiple dimensions.
Domain Authority Relativity
Your site’s authority relative to ranking pages matters more than absolute difficulty.
Check who ranks. Are the top results Wikipedia, major publications, and established brands? Or are they smaller sites and blogs similar to yours?
If sites with comparable authority rank, you can compete. If every result is a domain with millions of backlinks and decades of brand recognition, difficulty is effectively higher regardless of the score.
Consider topical authority. A site authoritative on cooking might struggle to rank for finance keywords despite overall domain strength. Google increasingly evaluates expertise within specific topics.
If your site has established authority in the keyword’s topic area, you have an advantage the difficulty score doesn’t capture.
SERP Composition Analysis
What appears on the results page affects your realistic opportunity.
SERP features reduce clicks. Featured snippets, People Also Ask, knowledge panels, and image packs capture attention. A keyword with 10,000 monthly searches but extensive SERP features might deliver fewer clicks than one with 5,000 searches and clean organic results.
Ad presence indicates commercial value but competition. Four ads above organic results push organic listings down, reducing click-through rates on organic positions.
Check result types. If product pages dominate, your blog post won’t rank. If guides dominate, your product page is mismatched. Intent alignment affects difficulty regardless of score.
Evaluate diversity. A SERP showing varied content types (some guides, some lists, some product pages) suggests Google isn’t certain of ideal format. You might find an angle.
Content Quality Assessment
Examine what actually ranks, not just who ranks.
Read the top results. Are they genuinely comprehensive and useful? Or are they thin, outdated, or poorly structured? Weak content creates opportunity.
Identify gaps. What do ranking pages miss? What questions go unanswered? What could be explained better? These gaps represent your competitive angle.
Assess freshness. When was the content last updated? Dated content on topics that evolve creates openings.
Check engagement signals. Although you can’t see Google’s data, you can infer: does the content seem likely to satisfy users, or would users bounce back to search for something better?
If top-ranking content is excellent, comprehensive, and from authoritative sources, true difficulty is high regardless of backlink-based scores.
Ranking Page Stability
How long have current pages held their positions?
Check SERP history. Tools like Ahrefs show position history. Pages that have ranked consistently for years have demonstrated relevance. Pages that recently achieved rankings are less established.
Evaluate URL age. Older URLs have accumulated signals over time. New URLs competing against entrenched pages face disadvantage.
Look for volatility. If rankings for a keyword fluctuate frequently, Google may not have found ideal results. Opportunity exists.
Stable, long-ranking pages are harder to displace than recent arrivals to the SERP.
Domain-Relative Difficulty Assessment
Instead of absolute difficulty, evaluate difficulty relative to your site.
Benchmark Against Current Rankings
Where do you already rank for similar keywords?
If you rank top 5 for “email marketing tips” with difficulty 40, a related keyword like “email marketing strategy” with difficulty 42 is achievable. You’ve demonstrated you can compete in that range for that topic.
If you’ve never ranked in the top 20 for any keyword above difficulty 25, suddenly targeting a 55 is likely overreaching.
Create a difficulty calibration:
- List keywords where you currently rank positions 1-5
- Note their difficulty scores
- This range represents your “proven achievable” zone
- Keywords significantly above this range require more effort or time
Topical Relevance Audit
Does your site have existing content and authority on the keyword’s topic?
Strong topical relevance: You have multiple pages on related subtopics, internal linking clusters, and some ranking keywords in the area. New keywords within this topic have lower effective difficulty.
Weak topical relevance: This keyword is adjacent to your main topics but you lack supporting content. Effective difficulty is higher because you need to build authority from scratch.
No topical relevance: The keyword is unrelated to your existing content. Maximum effective difficulty regardless of score.
Google’s understanding of what your site covers affects how difficult ranking for new keywords will be.
Backlink Profile Comparison
Compare your current backlink strength to ranking pages.
Export top ranking pages’ backlink profiles. How many referring domains do they have? What’s their domain authority?
Compare to your comparable pages. If your best content has 50 referring domains and competitors have 500, you need either more links or better content differentiation.
Identify link gaps. Can you realistically acquire the links needed? Or does the gap exceed your link building capacity?
Effort Estimation Framework
Translate difficulty assessment into resource requirements.
Quick Wins (Achievable Now)
Characteristics:
- Difficulty score below your proven range
- Ranking pages have comparable or lower authority
- Content quality is mediocre
- SERP shows sites similar to yours
- You have topical relevance
Example: For a mid-authority marketing blog, “email subject line examples for nonprofits” might be a quick win. Low competition, specific audience, and ranking pages are often thin listicles you can easily improve.
Effort required: Quality content creation, basic on-page optimization, minimal or no link building.
Timeline: 2-4 months to see results.
Medium-Term Targets (Achievable With Effort)
Characteristics:
- Difficulty score at or slightly above your proven range
- Ranking pages have somewhat stronger authority
- Content quality is good but not exceptional
- SERP shows mix of competitors
- You have some topical relevance
Example: “Email marketing best practices” for the same blog. Higher volume, more competition from established marketing sites, but achievable with comprehensive content and some promotion.
Effort required: Excellent content creation, on-page optimization, strategic internal linking, moderate link building.
Timeline: 4-8 months to see results.
Long-Term Investments (Achievable With Strategy)
Characteristics:
- Difficulty score significantly above your proven range
- Ranking pages are established authorities
- Content quality is strong
- SERP dominated by major players
- You have limited current relevance
Example: “Email marketing software” for the same blog. HubSpot, Mailchimp, and major publications dominate. Requires building substantial topical authority through supporting content before this becomes realistic.
Effort required: Exceptional content (potentially 10x quality of competitors), comprehensive topical authority building, significant link acquisition, time to build credibility.
Timeline: 8-18 months, potentially longer.
Currently Unrealistic
Characteristics:
- Difficulty score vastly above your proven range
- Only major brands and authoritative publications rank
- Content from ranking sites is comprehensive
- SERP features dominate, reducing organic opportunity
- You have no topical authority
Decision: Either build toward this keyword through related, achievable keywords first, or accept this isn’t a target for your current site.
Setting Realistic Targets
Balanced keyword targeting mixes difficulty levels.
Quick wins sustain momentum. Targeting only hard keywords means months without visible progress. Quick wins demonstrate results and build stakeholder confidence.
Medium targets drive growth. These keywords represent meaningful traffic and business value while being achievable with effort.
Long-term targets build future authority. Investing in difficult keywords pays off over time as your authority grows.
Portfolio approach:
- 30-40% quick wins
- 40-50% medium-term targets
- 10-20% long-term investments
- 0% currently unrealistic (unless you’re specifically building toward them)
Adjust ratios based on your situation. New sites need more quick wins. Established sites can pursue more ambitious targets.
Practical Assessment Workflow
For any keyword you’re considering targeting:
1. Check difficulty score. Is it within or above your proven range?
2. Search the keyword. What appears on the SERP? Who ranks?
3. Assess ranking pages. Domain authority, content quality, freshness, comprehensiveness.
4. Evaluate your position. Topical relevance, comparable authority, content capability.
5. Estimate effort. Quick win, medium, long-term, or unrealistic.
6. Decide. Target now, target later, or skip.
This process takes 5-10 minutes per keyword but prevents wasted effort on unachievable targets and missed opportunity on achievable ones.
When Low Difficulty Is Still Hard
Some caveats on “easy” keywords:
Zero volume might mean zero searches. Tools showing 0-10 volume with low difficulty might be genuinely unsearched topics.
SERP might not match intent. A low-difficulty keyword might show results that don’t match your content format because the true intent is different than you assumed.
Competition might be invisible. Forums, UGC, and social media sometimes rank for niche queries. Low difficulty doesn’t mean no competition.
Conversion might be low. Easy-to-rank keywords might not attract buyers. Traffic without business value is hollow success.
And conversely, high difficulty keywords are sometimes winnable with exceptional content or unique angles that current results lack.
Use difficulty as a filter, not a verdict. The SERP is the ultimate arbiter.
Resources
- Ahrefs Keyword Difficulty explained: https://ahrefs.com/blog/keyword-difficulty/
- Semrush Keyword Difficulty: https://www.semrush.com/kb/685-what-is-keyword-difficulty
- Moz Keyword Explorer: https://moz.com/explorer
Keyword difficulty methodologies vary by tool and evolve over time. Scores should inform strategy, not determine it. Actual ranking results depend on many factors beyond what any single metric captures.