Ever seen your page marked as a “Good Page” in Google Search Console but still getting little to no traffic?
This isn’t rare—a huge number of websites pass the “technical quality” check but fail to actually reach real users.
The core issue: Google’s scoring system focuses more on basic technical compliance (like crawlability and missing title tags)
But its traffic distribution system relies on user behavior data and how well content matches real needs.
If your content only checks the HTML boxes but lacks contextual value (for example, a “How to fix XX error” guide that’s all theory with no actual code or screenshots), the system might rate the page as “high quality”—but if users keep bouncing, your rankings will tank.
What does a “Good Page” rating actually check for?
When Google tags your page as a “Good Page,” it usually just means you’ve passed the basic technical checks—like the page is crawlable, has no dead links, and proper title tags.
But this rating is more like a basic health check report. It only says “nothing’s broken,” not whether your content actually helps users.
Technical compliance: The bare minimum from a machine’s point of view
- Crawlability: No robots.txt blocking, server response time under 3 seconds (slow sites get auto-downgraded);
- Basic structured data: Article/Schema markup is present but not necessarily detailed (e.g., a product page missing price/stock might still pass);
- Page health: No 404s, mobile-friendly (only viewport zoom is checked—not interactive lag);
Content scoring factors
- Text length: Over 1500 words = “enough info” by default (even if repetitive or fluff);
- Basic keyword matching: If the target keyword appears in the title or first 100 words, it’s considered covered (ignores user intent or deeper semantics);
- Duplicate content checks: Only flags text that’s 70%+ similar sitewide or across the web (simple rephrasing can bypass this);
The hidden flaw: Tech compliance > User value
Example: A 3,000-word “iPhone Battery Care Guide” gets labeled “Good Page” for having full HTML5 structure and proper ALT tags—but it just repeats common sense like “avoid high temps,” with no model-specific tips or battery life test data. Users average less than 15 seconds on the page.
Risk Alert: In some niches, Google still uses template-based scoring (like checking for author credentials in medical content without verifying actual clinical experience).
4 Real Reasons Your Page Has No Traffic
Keyword Trap: Flawed keyword strategy
- What you’ll see: Target keyword has super low search volume (under 100/month on SEMrush) or is ultra-competitive (Ahrefs KD > 70). For instance, “Blockchain Technology Principles” has high search volume but is dominated by big sites—smaller ones struggle to rank.
- Fix it: Go after long-tail, question-based keywords (like “How does blockchain solve data trust issues”). Use Google’s “People Also Ask” to find real user questions and lower competition.
Hollow Content: Scoring ≠ Value to users
- Typical issue: Tutorial-style articles list generic steps with no supporting materials (e.g., a “Python Scraping Tutorial” that lacks code templates or anti-blocking tool suggestions), so users can’t actually act on it;
- How to spot it: Use Hotjar heatmaps to track clicks. If key sections (like “Solution Steps”) have no clicks or hover time, you need to add real examples or tools.
Page Isolation: No support from content ecosystem
- On-site issue: No related internal links (e.g., a “Best Router Guide” doesn’t link to “WiFi Signal Boosting Tips”), so users bounce with nowhere else to go;
- Off-site issue: Zero high-quality backlinks (check with Ahrefs; if top competitors have 50+ backlinks, consider guest posts or resource swaps to catch up);
User Behavior Red Flags: Google’s invisible penalty
- How to check: In GA4, if page average time-on-site is under 40 seconds and bounce rate is over 85% (excluding branded keywords), your content isn’t matching intent;
- Quick fix: Add your “main takeaway” in the first 3 scrolls (e.g., a “3-Minute Quick Solution” button) to hook users who skim-read and reduce bounce rate.
Google’s Scoring System vs. Traffic Algorithm
Google’s scoring system and its traffic algorithm actually run on two different sets of rules.
So a page might pass the tech checks (like complete Schema markup and no dead links) and get labeled “Good Page”
But the traffic system may bury it on page 20 of results if user bounce rate is too high (like under 30 seconds of average time-on-page).
Tech Gets Priority: Machine scoring leans too hard on code compliance
- What happens: A page gets high marks for perfect HTML5 structure and complete ALT tags, but the content is hollow (e.g., a “Best Headphones of 2024” post just lists brand names without sound specs or real-world comparisons);
- Real-world case: A medical info site posts articles with author title disclaimers (ticking the EEAT boxes), but skips citing the latest research. Users searching “Side effects of XX drug” leave fast—bounce rate over 90%, ranking drops anyway;
- Best practice: Improve both tech and depth together. In ALT tags, add contextual keywords (like “Noise-cancellation test results for wireless headphones” instead of just “headphones photo”).
User Intent Mismatch: Rating System Fails to Recognize Real Needs
- Conflict Scenario: A search like “iPhone lagging” might mean the user wants a “memory cleanup tutorial” or a “new phone recommendation,” but the rating system only checks if the page includes “iPhone” and “lagging” keywords. In contrast, traffic algorithms rely on click-through rate or time-on-page to infer real intent.
- Data Discrepancy: A page titled “iPhone Lag Fix” may contain the right keywords, but if the solution only works for iOS 14 and doesn’t mention that, iOS 16 users will bounce. Result? Traffic drops 72% in 7 days.
- Fix Strategy: Reverse-engineer real user intent by looking at the top 5 Google search results. If competitors include “2023 Version” or “Compatible with iOS 16” in titles, update your content with those qualifiers.
EEAT Verification Flaws: Credentials ≠ Real Expertise
- Rule Flaw: The rating system only checks author credentials (like “written by a medical doctor”), but doesn’t flag outdated advice (like recommending discontinued meds) or contradictory logic (like advising both “drink more water” and “limit water intake” in the same article).
- Traffic Penalty Case: A nutrition article written by someone with “10 years of experience” didn’t mention that high blood pressure patients should avoid a certain supplement. Result? Negative feedback and search visibility dropped 48% in 3 weeks.
- Optimization Priority: Add “last updated” dates and hyperlink sources in the author section. These build trust signals that help traffic algorithms gauge content quality.
How to Game the Rating System for Traffic
For example, a blog titled “Air Fryer Buying Guide” might pass the rating check by listing specs (like power or capacity), but still get zero traffic.
But if it includes real user pain point solutions (like “oil smoke test comparison” or “best for 6-person households”), it’ll meet both rating standards and actual search intent.
Keyword Strategy Reset: Ditch the Saturated Terms, Target Long-Tail Needs
- Mining Long-Tail Question Keywords: Use SurferSEO to find low-competition, high-intent question keywords (like “Why is XX not working” or “How to fix XX error”). Tools like AnswerThePublic are great for this.
- Reverse-Engineer Competitors: Check the top 3 results for backlinks (via Ahrefs) and content structure (via Clearscope). Replicate their authority link sources and add missing how-to sections like “Things to Avoid.”
Content Makeover Hacks: Trick the System with Smart Formatting
User Trust Signals:
- Add at least 2 authentic user testimonials (e.g., “@JohnDoe: Followed this guide and fixed the error code” + timestamp);
- Include an “author’s real-life test log” (like “took 3 hours to complete, materials used”), which boosts the “Experience” factor in EEAT.
Interactive Tool Embeds:
- Add downloadable PDF checklists to how-to articles (use tools like ScribbleText to generate templates) — keeps users on the page longer;
- Add a real-time price comparison plugin (like Prisync) to product recommendation pages — boosts average time-on-page by 90 seconds.
Technical Tweaks That Deliver Big: Low Effort, High SEO Impact
Semantic ALT Text for Images: Use LSI (latent semantic indexing) keywords instead of keyword stuffing — e.g., “Battery test chart for AirPods Pro” instead of just “AirPods Pro image”;
Mobile Interaction Optimization:
- Adjust button touch zones to prevent accidental taps — use Hotjar heatmaps to guide changes;
- Get first screen load time under 1.5 seconds using WebP images and lazy loading — ShortPixel works well for auto-compression.
From now on, let real user behavior guide your optimizations — not the false sense of security from a rating system.
