Pages Google ranks but visitors do not buy on, either the wrong intent (an informational page ranking on a commercial query) or a broken landing-page experience.
At a glance
A cross-channel alert table that joins Google Search Console page-level impressions against the revenue attributed to those same landing pages, then surfaces the URLs where Google supplies plenty of organic visibility but almost no money comes out the other end. A high-impression, low-revenue page is one of two things: it is ranking for the wrong intent (an informational article showing up on a query with buying intent), or it has a broken landing-page experience (slow, confusing, out of stock, or mismatched to what the searcher expected). Either way, Google is handing you demand you are failing to convert. The card names the page so you can fix the intent match or the experience.
| What it tracks | Indexed landing pages where Search Console impressions are high but revenue per impression is far below the site average. Each row pairs a URL’s organic impressions with the revenue attributed to organic sessions landing there. |
| Data source | Search Console Search Analytics API (page dimension: impressions, clicks, average position) joined to the store’s revenue-by-landing-page data (from the commerce connector, attributed to organic sessions). See detail: “Pages Google ranks but visitors do not buy on, wrong intent (informational page ranking commercially) or broken landing-page experience.” |
| Time window | 30D vsP. The trailing 30 days are compared against the previous 30-day period, so the card shows both the current divergence and whether it is widening. |
| Alert trigger | any landing with >2k impressions and revenue per impression < 10% of site avg. A page must clear both gates: material visibility (more than 2,000 impressions in the window) AND revenue efficiency below a tenth of the site-wide average revenue per impression. |
| Why revenue per impression | Normalising revenue by impressions (not by sessions or clicks) lets you compare pages of very different traffic sizes on the same “is Google’s demand turning into money?” scale. A page can have a healthy CTR yet still divert valuable impressions into a dead end. |
| Two diagnoses | Wrong intent (blog or info page ranking on a commercial query) versus broken experience (a commercial page that should convert but does not). The table’s clue is the page type and its average position. |
| Card class | Sensitivity and cross-channel: thresholds are configurable per profile in the Sensitivity tab, and it joins Search Console to the commerce connector. |
| Roles | owner, marketing |
Calculation
The card is built in four steps:- Establish the site baseline. Compute the site-wide average revenue per organic impression: total organic-attributed revenue over the 30-day window divided by total organic impressions from Search Console. This is the bar each page is measured against.
- Pull the high-visibility pages. From the Search Console Search Analytics API, request the
pagedimension over the trailing 30 days and keep every URL with more than 2,000 impressions. - Attach revenue. For each of those URLs, attach the revenue attributed to organic sessions that landed on it (from the commerce connector). Divide by that page’s impressions to get its revenue per impression.
- Filter and compare. Keep rows where the page’s revenue per impression is below 10% of the site average. Then compare each surviving row against the previous 30-day period (
vsP) to show whether the divergence is new, widening or stable.
Worked example
A UK skincare brand on its own storefront, Search Console and the commerce connector both live. Site-wide average revenue per organic impression for the 30 days to 14 Apr 26 is £0.42. The 10% gate is therefore £0.042. The card fires with three URLs.| URL | Impressions (30D) | Clicks | Avg position | Revenue (organic) | Rev/impression | % of site avg | Likely cause |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
/blog/best-ingredients-for-dry-skin | 41,300 | 1,820 | 3.4 | £290 | £0.007 | 1.7% | Wrong intent: info page on a commercial query |
/collections/moisturisers | 12,600 | 410 | 5.1 | £180 | £0.014 | 3.4% | Broken experience: should convert, does not |
/products/night-cream-50ml | 4,900 | 95 | 8.7 | £62 | £0.013 | 3.0% | Low CTR plus weak conversion |
- The blog post is the classic wrong-intent leak.
/blog/best-ingredients-for-dry-skinranks 3.4 and pulls 41,300 impressions, more than any product page, but it earns almost nothing. The searchers are in buying mode, Google is sending them to an article, and the article has no clear path to a relevant product. The fix is not to slow the page or delete it; it is to add prominent, relevant product links (or build a proper commercial landing page for that query and let the blog support it). - The collection page is the broken-experience leak.
/collections/moisturisersis a commercial page that should convert, ranks a respectable 5.1, yet returns only 3.4% of the site’s revenue efficiency. That points at the experience: maybe the bestsellers are out of stock, the page is slow, or the filtering is confusing. This is where you cross-check Slow Indexed Pages (GSC × Website Performance). vsPtold the team which leak was new. Comparing against the prior 30 days, the blog leak was long-standing (it had always under-converted), but the moisturisers collection had a revenue-per-impression of £0.21 last period and £0.014 now, a sharp, recent drop. That recency made it the priority: something changed, and recent breakage is usually cheaper to fix than a structural intent mismatch.- The cause of the collection drop was an out-of-stock bestseller. The brand’s hero moisturiser had sold out and the collection page kept ranking and pulling impressions while the top product showed “sold out”. Restocking (and, in the interim, promoting the next-best alternative to the top of the collection) lifted revenue per impression back toward the baseline within two weeks.
vsP column to triage recent breakage before structural mismatch.
Sibling cards merchants should reference together
| Card | Why pair it with Organic-to-Revenue Divergence |
|---|---|
| Slow Indexed Pages (GSC × Website Performance) | The other cross-channel revenue-at-risk card. If a divergent page is also slow, page experience is a likely cause of the broken-experience diagnosis. |
| High Impressions / Low Clicks | Separates “they do not click” from “they click but do not buy”. A page low on both cards is a snippet problem; low here only is a landing problem. |
| Performance by Page Type | Tells you whether divergence clusters in blog, collection or product templates, which points at the systemic fix. |
| Pages Losing Traffic | A divergent page that is also losing clicks may be slipping in rank as well as failing to convert. |
| Position by Page | Confirms each URL’s current rank; high rank plus low revenue is the clearest wrong-intent or broken-experience signal. |
| CTR by Page | Page-level click-through; a healthy CTR with low revenue isolates the problem to the landing page itself. |
| Top Pages by Impressions | The same impressions axis this card filters on; cross-reference your highest-visibility pages against their revenue. |
| Ranking by Intent | Helps confirm the wrong-intent diagnosis by showing how informational versus commercial queries rank. |
Reconciling against the source
This card joins Search Console to your commerce revenue data, so reconcile each side. The Search Console side (impressions, clicks, position): Rebuild the visibility half in Google Search Console under Performance → Search results, switch to the Pages tab, set the date range to the last 30 days, and read impressions, clicks and average position per URL. Bear in mind:- GSC data is typically 2 to 3 days delayed, so the most recent days read low or empty.
- Rare queries are anonymised, so long-tail impression totals can be marginally understated.
- The Pages report caps at 1,000 rows in the UI; use the Search Analytics API for the full list.
| Reason | Direction | What to do |
|---|---|---|
| GSC 2 to 3 day delay vs same-day revenue means the two windows do not end on the same day. | Revenue per impression can look slightly off at the window edge. | Align both sides to a window ending ~3 days ago. |
| Attribution model: landing-page-of-organic-session vs last-click. | Revenue per page differs materially under last-click. | Confirm both reports use landing-page attribution for organic. |
| Channel definition of “organic”. GSC counts Google organic only; GA4’s Organic Search can include other engines. | Impressions (GSC) and revenue (GA4) bases differ. | Restrict the revenue side to Google organic where possible. |
| Currency and refunds. Net vs gross revenue, and whether refunds are deducted. | Revenue per impression shifts with the basis. | Match the revenue basis to your profile setting. |
URL normalisation (slash, www, parameters) can split or merge rows. | A page may merge in our join but appear twice in raw GSC. | Confirm canonical URLs match across connectors. |
Known limitations / merchant FAQs
How do I tell wrong intent from a broken experience? Read the page type and its rank. A blog, guide or FAQ URL ranking on a commercial query, especially at a high position, is almost always wrong intent: the searcher wants to buy and you are answering a question instead. A collection or product URL that ranks well but under-converts is almost always a broken experience: out of stock, slow, confusing, or mismatched to the query. ThevsP column helps too, a sudden drop points at a recent breakage, a long-standing low number points at structural intent mismatch.
Should I delete or de-optimise the wrong-intent pages?
Usually not. An informational page pulling 41,000 impressions is a content asset. The fix is to capture the commercial intent it is attracting: add prominent, relevant product modules to the article, or build a dedicated commercial landing page for the query and interlink. Deleting the page throws away hard-won visibility.
Why revenue per impression rather than conversion rate?
Conversion rate needs a session denominator and ignores how many impressions a page wastes before anyone even clicks. Revenue per impression measures the whole funnel from Google’s demand to your money on one scale, so a page that ranks brilliantly but converts the wrong audience still shows as a leak. It also lets you compare a 40,000-impression blog post against a 4,000-impression product page fairly.
A page is on this card but I know it converts well. What is going on?
Most often an attribution mismatch: this card attributes revenue to the organic-session landing page, while your internal report may credit a later campaign touch or a different channel. Reconcile both sides on landing-page attribution and the same definition of organic before treating the row as real. The 2 to 3 day GSC delay can also distort revenue per impression at the very edge of the window.
Does seasonality trip this card?
It can. A gift-guide page might rank and convert in December but pull impressions with little revenue in June. The vsP 30-day comparison absorbs week-to-week noise but not a full seasonal swing. For seasonal pages, judge against the same period last year rather than the prior 30 days, and adjust the threshold in the Sensitivity tab if a known seasonal page keeps tripping.
Why a 10% of site average threshold?
It isolates the genuinely broken pages from the merely below-average ones. Plenty of pages sit a little under the site mean for honest reasons (top-of-funnel content, niche products). A page returning less than a tenth of the site’s revenue efficiency while pulling more than 2,000 impressions is categorically different: it is wasting demand at scale. You can tune the percentage and the impression floor per profile in the Sensitivity tab.