Does Tools give 100% correct answers?

[emmasmithes]

Hello Everyone!
Let's have a debate about does tools like Semrush, Ahrefs etc give 100% correct information? Like you do not need anything else besides these tools?
I already know the answer just looking for your insights.

[rproffitt]

Please share the answer.

Also, a man with one watch knows what time it is, a man with two watches is never sure. Same for using multiple tools, you can't be sure once you measure with different tools.

[Dani]

Of course not. Ahrefs, Moz, etc. all have their own crawlers, and their reports are limited to the data their crawlers collect.

Unfortunately, their crawlers are not able to identify what Google might like or dislike about any particular URL. Therefore, there’s no way of knowing for sure which backlinks Google itself might not be counting, or which pages Google might think are low quality.

[bijutoha]

In my journey, I've found there are always limitations. For example, Ahrefs and Semrush can sometimes provide different data on the exact keywords or backlinks. This can be confusing, especially for beginners, and highlights that these tools are estimates, not gospel.

The real value lies in how you use these tools. They can be a huge time-saver, allowing you to focus on the strategic aspects of SEO. However, it's important to critically analyze the data they provide and use it with your judgment and expertise. Think of them as powerful assistants, not replacements for your SEO knowledge.

[m_624]

No, tools like mine don't guarantee 100% correct answers. While we strive for accuracy, the information provided is based on patterns in data and understanding of language, which may not always be perfect. It's always a good idea to verify important information from multiple reliable sources.

[rproffitt]

How accurate must the answers be (in regard to the topic at hand)?

Sometimes folk succumb to the Nirvana or Perfect Solution Fallacy.

However if we're dealing with currency, we demand to account for every penny.
For the topic at hand, close enough is close enough.

[rproffitt]

Hello Dani,
It's in the first question: "100% correct information?"

As such it falls into the Nirvana or Perfect Solution Fallacy domain.

[Dani]

rproffitt, for the question at hand (which I might rephrase as, "How accurately can third-party SEO tools guesstimate Google's understanding of the entire link graph across the world wide web?"), I'm not quite sure that there is a single accurate answer out there that the tools aspire to come close enough to.

Firstly, the web is ever-changing. New pages are being created, modified, and destroyed every single millisecond. I'm not quite sure that it's possible for even Google, with their vast resources in crawling the web, and the enormous complexities of crawling the web, to be able to take a single snapshot of the entire WWW and capture any single moment in time.

That right there puts an end to your question, because accuracy goes out the window when there's no true answer. (One could argue there is a true answer at any single moment in time, but it's just not verifiable.) However, reading between the lines, it's obvious the question being asked here is how close can third-party tools get to Google's answer.

So, for some context, Google cares about the quality and quantity of backlinks to each and every individual URL on the web. As SEOs who want traffic from Google, we therefore care about the quality and quantity of backlinks. However, being completely transparent here, we really only care about the quality and quantity of the backlinks that Google cares about. We want to know which ones those are. We want to know how Google rates each one of them. Quality matters. Not all backlinks are created equal.

Enter stage left all of these third-party SEO tools that, themselves, crawl the entire web, building their own link graphs. As customers of these tools, this is the only insight we have, and it's something more than nothing.

However, just how close do these tools come to telling us what Google thinks. There's no way to ever know, really. We don't have a good enough understanding of the inner workings of Google's algorithm to be able to know exactly how important backlinks are to the equation. We also don't have any verifiable way of knowing which backlinks Google likes or doesn't like, or chooses to discount for which or what reasons.

So, there you have it, Mr. Owl. The world may never know.

[Dani]

Oh, and as far as if you need anything else beyond these tools, I would say YES, absolutely! These tools are to be taken with a grain of salt. They provide insight, but they're just that, tools. They don't actually give you the answers. You need to be smart about it and gleam information from them and then determine how you're going to use that information to create actionable insights.

[Sheyna28]

It's in the first question: "100% correct information?"

I think it was poorly worded. The clarification was in the sentence after that where they wrote, "Like you do not need anything else besides these tools?". I'm sure no one is going to argue that the tools are capable of giving the same information as Google. I think the question was asking for a debate on whether good enough is just that, good enough.

[Sheyna28]

Oops, sorry! Posted under my test account.

- Dani

[Dani]

Darn you, giving my test account reputation points! The whole point of the test account was to have an account that was flying under the radar as a hoi polloi.

[Umar_35]

Tools like Semrush and Ahrefs are highly reliable and provide valuable SEO insights, but they are not 100% accurate. They offer estimates based on their own data sets and algorithms, which can lead to discrepancies compared to real-time data from sources like Google Analytics and Search Console. Additionally, these tools cannot fully capture user behavior, content quality, or adapt immediately to algorithm updates. Therefore, for a comprehensive SEO strategy, it's essential to use these tools in conjunction with direct analytics data, manual audits, and strategic human analysis.

[Osama_Khan]

No they are not 100% correct, Human touch is necessary. It is solely my opinion.