Every number on this site, audited.
The proof bands elsewhere on this site say the spread is wide and that an average is not a promise. Those are words. This page is the arithmetic behind them, including the half of the cohort that went backwards.
How does askotter measure the client results it publishes?
askotter publishes two aggregate figures, both measured in each client's own Google Search Console rather than in a tool askotter controls, over one matched pair of 90-day windows applied identically to every client. The prior window is 8 February 2026 to 8 May 2026 and the recent window is 9 May 2026 to 6 August 2026, with the data pulled on 7 August 2026. The cohort is 8 clients, of which 6 are included in the averages; 2 launched inside the recent window and have no prior period to divide by, so they are excluded rather than counted as infinite growth.
Read the full answerShow less
Organic clicks grew +16% on average per client while the median client change was −4%, and 3 of 6 clients grew on that metric. Pages earning impressions grew +323% on average with a median of +407%, and 5 of 6 clients grew. The averages are means of each client's own percentage change, the sample is small enough that one client moves it materially, and no figure here is modelled, projected or extrapolated.
- Cohort
- 8 clients in total. 6 included in the averages, 2 excluded for having no prior-period baseline.
- Windows
- One matched pair of 90-day windows applied identically to every client: 8 February 2026 to 8 May 2026, against 9 May 2026 to 6 August 2026.
- Source
- Each client's own Google Search Console, pulled on 7 August 2026. Not a third-party estimate and not a tool askotter controls.
- Organic clicks
- Mean +16%, median −4%. 3 of 6 clients grew, 3 declined.
- Pages earning impressions
- Mean +323%, median +407%. 5 of 6 clients grew, 1 declined.
- Not for
- Anyone reading these as a forecast. The sample is small, the spread is wide, half the cohort lost organic clicks over this window, and past client results do not predict a future one.
The mean, and the number beside it that matters more.
A mean over six clients is moved a long way by one outlier. The median is the middle client, so the two together say something the mean alone cannot. On organic clicks they point in opposite directions, and that is the most important fact on this page.
| Attribute | Mean (what the bands publish) | Median (the middle client) | Grew / declined |
|---|---|---|---|
| Organic clicks | +16% | −4% | 3 grew, 3 declined, of 6. |
| Pages earning impressions | +323% | +407% | 5 grew, 1 declined, of 6. |
The organic clicks mean is +16% and the median is −4%. Those disagree because one client grew a great deal and half the cohort went backwards. The accurate sentence is that the average client gained clicks while the typical client did not, over this window. Anyone quoting +16% without that qualifier is quoting it wrong, including us.
All 6 included clients, by sector.
Every client in the averages, sorted by organic clicks so the declines are at the bottom where they can be seen. Clients are identified by sector only: askotter does not publish a client's name, domain or figures without written permission, and no permission has been given.
| Attribute | Organic clicks | Pages earning impressions |
|---|---|---|
| Chiropractic care | +117% | +375% |
| Mobile auto repair | +54% | +18% |
| Healthcare & dental | +16% | +467% |
| Financial services | −24% | +659% |
| Energy consulting | −25% | −20% |
| Moving & relocation | −39% | +439% |
Excluded, and why
2 further clients are in the book and are kept out of both averages. Each launched inside the recent window and has no prior 90-day period to divide by. A percentage needs a denominator, and reporting a launch from zero as infinite growth, or quietly treating a zero as a one, would make the averages look better and mean less.
- Health & wellness: launched inside the recent window, no prior-period baseline, excluded from both averages.
- Office furniture & interiors: launched inside the recent window, no prior-period baseline, excluded from both averages.
Their pages are counted in the portfolio reach figure, because those pages are genuinely in the index and that figure is a total rather than a rate of change.
How a client gets into the numbers.
One window pair for everybody
Every client is measured over the same two 90-day windows. Windows picked per client to flatter each one cannot be averaged together, which is what an earlier version of these figures did and why it was replaced.
A prior period is required
A client that launched inside the recent window has no denominator and is excluded from both averages. This is the rule that removes the most flattering numbers in the book, which is how you can tell it is applied honestly.
The figure has to be pullable
Every number comes from a live property in askotter's Search Console access. A former client whose property could not be re-verified on this basis was removed rather than carried forward on older figures.
Nothing is modelled or projected
No figure on this site is estimated, forecast, extrapolated or adjusted. If a number cannot be pulled from a client's own console, it is not published. Declines stay in the averages at full weight.
Averages are per client, not pooled
The mean is the average of each client's own percentage change, so a large client does not dominate a small one. Pooling the raw totals instead would let the biggest property in the book write the headline on its own.
Pages earning impressions, not "pages indexed"
Search Console does not expose a true index count through its API, so the metric is distinct URLs earning at least one impression in the window. That undercounts, which is the safe direction for a claim of ours.
The limits, stated plainly.
- The sample is small. 6 clients is enough to describe what happened and not enough to generalise from. One client moves both means materially.
- Half the cohort declined on clicks. 3 of 6 lost organic clicks over this window. The mean is positive because the gains were larger than the losses, not because most clients gained.
- Clicks and impressions are not revenue. Neither metric says a call was answered, a quote was sent or a job was won. Conversion tracking is per client and is not aggregated here.
- There is no control group. These are before-and-after windows on live businesses, so seasonality, a competitor's actions and Google's own updates all sit inside the change alongside askotter's work.
- Clients are not randomly selected. They are the businesses that hired askotter, which is a self-selected group by definition.
- A 90-day pair is a short window. Search results move slowly, and a single pair of quarters is a reading rather than a trend.
The AI visibility figures published on the answer engine optimization page are measured separately, in each client's own Google Analytics over the 180 days after the work started, and carry their own method note. Assistant referrals start from a very small base for a local business, so those percentages move a long way in both directions.
Named case studies, when permission exists.
Everything above is anonymised by sector because askotter does not publish a client's name, domain, screenshots or quotes without written permission. No client has given it yet, so none is published, and no substitute has been invented to fill the gap.
When permission is in hand, a case study here will carry the starting state, the exact dates, the work shipped, screenshots from the client's own Search Console and Analytics, the booked-work outcome, a direct quote and the limitations, and it will link back to this page for the cohort it sits inside. A claim that cannot be checked is not worth making.
Questions about the method
How many clients are these averages based on?
Why is the median lower than the mean?
How many clients declined?
Where does the data come from?
Why are the clients not named?
Do these numbers predict what my business would get?
Check it against your own numbers.
The free audit reads your site and your own Search Console, so the baseline you start from is yours rather than ours. Yours whether or not you sign up.
Self-managed is $99/mo and scales with the compute you use. Our team runs it from $600/mo.