Ahrefs report shows 5.3% of top 3 SERP positions are "100% AI"

Steptoe

Elite Member
Jr. Executive VIP
Jr. VIP
Joined
Aug 9, 2017
Messages
5,562
Reaction score
6,853
Ahrefs recently analysed around 331k pages from top 10 rankings across 100k SERPs, using their AI content detector: https://ahrefs.com/blog/google-doesnt-punish-ai-content/

It found that 5.3% of #1-3 SERPs positions were '100% AI generated' according to their detector, with 9% of #1-3 positions being >80% AI generated. We of course have to take this with a boulder-sized chunk of salt, as AI detectors are rickety at best.

AI content also appeared in every top 10 position (8-12% very high AI per position), with only a slight increase in AI % as you go down the SERPs. As far as indexing goes, high-AI pages are indexed at ~40% vs ~49% for low-AI. This is a lower indexation rate for AI content, but shows they are far from index blocked.

As you'd guess, pages with <50% AI make up 82.2% of top-3 rankings, meaning the majority are still mostly human-written. But this is a study you can pass on to the 'AI content doesn't rank' zealots.
 
Ahrefs recently analysed around 331k pages from top 10 rankings across 100k SERPs, using their AI content detector: https://ahrefs.com/blog/google-doesnt-punish-ai-content/

It found that 5.3% of #1-3 SERPs positions were '100% AI generated' according to their detector, with 9% of #1-3 positions being >80% AI generated. We of course have to take this with a boulder-sized chunk of salt, as AI detectors are rickety at best.

AI content also appeared in every top 10 position (8-12% very high AI per position), with only a slight increase in AI % as you go down the SERPs. As far as indexing goes, high-AI pages are indexed at ~40% vs ~49% for low-AI. This is a lower indexation rate for AI content, but shows they are far from index blocked.

As you'd guess, pages with <50% AI make up 82.2% of top-3 rankings, meaning the majority are still mostly human-written. But this is a study you can pass on to the 'AI content doesn't rank' zealots.
At this point, I don't have issues with AI assisted content anymore. There's no real incentive to not incorporate some form of AI assistance when creating content these days.

Like you pointed out AI detectors are not as reliable as many we would like. It's still possible there are many false positives in those numbers.
 
The part I find more interesting is the gap between Perception and reality. Many people still assume AI content means auto-generated junk, but the data suggests the situation is more complicated. I think the next challenge will be identifying What actually makes a page useful, because AI detection alone doesn't tell much about the final quality.
 
It's understandable if humans are not interested in wasting time writing articles or creating blogs manually anymore
Why do that if an AI will steal your content creation, show it on the Google AI Overview and pay you nothing?
 
Back
Top