Logging out of Google vs. &PWS=0 ?
-
I typically append &pws=0 to my Google queries when I'm gathering results to share with a client.
I recently sat in on another digital marketing firms presentation to the client, and they made a big deal about how their search engineers had conducted all the searched by "painstaking logging out of google, using a fresh browser, etc..." In my mind I was thinking that it was either a search engineer wasting time, or some hyperbole to impress the client.
But I didn't really know for sure. Is &pws=0 actually equivellent to using a completely annonymous browser. For fun, I ran some queries under incognito on chrome running off a thumbdrive, and compared them to &PWS=0 results from my everday browswer while logged into google.
I couldn't see any difference, but in my quick informal test, I also didn't find any difference between a personal SERP and a &PWS=0 SERP, so maybe I just didn't try the right query.
Any thoughts?
-
Yep, I agree with you there - never have trusted using &pws=0 logged in or out
-
To be honest adding &pws=0 is not as strong as it once was a few years ago, in todays market if you want one of the best ways to view non personalized results you need to use the Google Ad Preview Tool -
https://adwords.google.com/d/AdPreview/?__u=1000000000&__c=1000000000
Their is no way logging out will totally wipe all the data.
-
Pretty sure that &pws=0 doesn't work for google instant, but does when instant is disabled. So logged out/clearing cookies etc seems like the most accurate when Instant is on.
I usually to run a seperate firefox browser (everything else in Chrome/Safari) with 'never remember history' assigned, instant assigned off, not logged in and running a cool little plug-in that automatically adds the &pws=0 to google searches (find it here fire IE and FF). I find this to be pretty suitable for 'un-personalised' results and not much hassle.
Cyrus wrote an article about this a little while ago that you might find useful. But i agree, the logging out every time and clearing all your history seems like overkill.
-
I've no direct research either way, but when I met Eric Enge (of Stone Temple Consulting) he told me to be logged in and use &pws=0. I'd very much trust his opinion
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
Inconsistent Keyword Search Volume & Difficulty Across Tools (e.g., Moz, Google Keyword Planner, Ahrefs, Semrush)
Hi there, Moz Community! I'm reaching out for some guidance on keyword research discrepancies. I'm currently targeting the keyword "sui gas bill" for my blog, sngplbill, which focuses on information related to Sui gas bills. I've used several keyword research tools, including Moz, Google Keyword Planner, Ahrefs, and Semrush, and each platform provides different search volume and keyword difficulty scores: Moz: No search volume data, Keyword Difficulty (KD) 24
Keyword Research | | Faizali.786
Google Keyword Planner: Search volume 100k-1M, Difficulty (Low)
Semrush: Search volume 90k, KD 31
Ahrefs: KD 1 (Very Easy)
These varying results are causing some confusion. Ideally, I'd like to understand which platform offers the most reliable data for search volume and keyword difficulty. Here are some additional details that might be helpful: My target location: Pakistan My Questions: What factors might contribute to these discrepancies in keyword data across different tools?
Considering my niche (Sui gas bill information in Pakistan), which platform would you recommend for the most accurate search volume and keyword difficulty estimates?
Are there any additional factors to consider beyond search volume and keyword difficulty when selecting keywords for content strategy?
Any insights you can provide would be greatly appreciated!
Capture sui gas bill semrush.PNG Capture moz sui gas bill.PNG Capture gkp sui gas bill.PNG Capture ahref sui gas bill.PNG
Thanks,0 -
How can I tell if Google considers two words to mean the same thing
For example, "wives" and "brides" They're often interchangeable, but given context they can still mean fairly different things. Any help would be appreciated! Thanks
Keyword Research | | CupidTeam0 -
Google Adwords traffic shows a different level to Google Trends
Hello I am doing some keyword research support for a client. The keywords that we are looking at Keyword A is 880 LMS and Keyword B is 2900 LMS through Google Adwords. When we look at Google Trends Keyword A is showing much high traffic than keyword B. Does anyone know why this is? Many thanks
Keyword Research | | mblsolutions0 -
Extrapolating Google volumes from the Bing volumes
What would you give someone as a general rule for extrapolating Google search volumes from the Bing volumes? I'm looking at the Moz keyword analysis tools and only Bing search volumes are listed so I'm wondering how I could those figures to estimate Google search volumes.
Keyword Research | | Harbor_Compliance0 -
Google Adword Keyword Planner
Previously I always utilsed the Google Adword Keyword Tool to provide traffic estimations in order to assist with my keyword research. I have recently revised these levels of traffic using the new Keyword Planner. Local Traffic results are approximately have fallen approximately 85%, I have anaylsed this over approximately 50 results. I am aware that the new Keyword Planner does not have a local traffic column anymore so I have utilised the location filter. I have the same problem in all my campaigns, in two different countries, please can someone advise why this is and how I can collect accurate keyword data. Kind regards
Keyword Research | | Arkix0 -
Keyword Analysis ranking is not according to google
I'm confused with Keyword Analysis tool because when i run it it show me like this: Keywords: Alpaca Scarves Rank 1. page1 2 page2 3 page3 4 page4 Rank 1: page1 p. authority: 26, page linking root domains: 2 domain autority: 31 root domain linking root domains: 33 Rank 4: page4 p. authority: 26, page linking root domains: 2 domain autority: 45 root domain linking root domains: 232 I think that the rank 4 should be in the 1. can you help me to understand it? Alfredo
Keyword Research | | russelgz0 -
Why does google's autocomplete not align with google's keyword tool?
Is google autocomplete based solely off keyword search volume? Or is there some other factors i am missing here? Here's an example: Auto complete suggestions for 'storage toronto': [storage toronto cost] [storage toronto downtown] [storage toronto rates] [storage toronto leaside] [storage toronto prices] [storage toronto dupont] [storage toronto laird] [storage toronto eastern ave] [storage toronto ontario] Google adwords keyword tool results for these: <colgroup><col width="151"> <col width="129"> <col width="169"></colgroup>
Keyword Research | | adriandg
| Keyword | Global Monthly Searches | Local Monthly Searches |
| [storage toronto cost] | 0 | 0 |
| [storage toronto downtown] | 36 | 28 |
| [storage toronto rates] | 0 | 0 |
| [storage toronto leaside] | 0 | 0 |
| [storage toronto prices] | 73 | 73 |
| [storage toronto dupont] | 0 | 0 |
| [storage toronto laird] | 0 | 0 |
| [storage toronto eastern ave] | 0 | 0 |
| [storage toronto ontario] | 0 | 0 | So here is what i find confusing: If [storage toronto cost] is the top suggestion for [storage toronto...] then why does google say it has 0 monthly searches? Why isn't [storage toronto downtown] the first suggestion? or better yet, why isn't [storage toronto prices] the top suggestion? So either: 1) google adwords keyword tool is wrong. or 2) google suggest isn't based on just volume?? I've run these same keywords through Bing's Excel keyword information spreadsheet query and it came back saying all keywords had 0 searches ever, except for...drumroll: [storage toronto prices] with 7 monthly searches, once, in august, and 0 all other months. Now i assume that bing/yahoo numbers are significantly smaller, but this does show that that the same keyword is the most popular, so in some way suggests that google's keyword is accurate. So i guess this brings be back to my confusion, what other factors is google's suggest based on, because it obviously isn't primarily search volume. And yes, i have made sure to clear caches, and disable personalized search and search history, and tried the query in several browsers, just to double check i wasn't getting a personalized list, so we can rule that out. Thanks, Storwell.0