Loading
Not yet a gap worth filling. The first two items are the ones that decide it.
Weighted so that a gap you cannot sell into scores low however easy it looks to rank for. Easy rankings for the wrong topic are the most expensive kind of content.
It finds clusters where there is evidenced demand and no page of yours is targeting it — the clearest kind of content brief there is.
Demand is evidenced by impressions you already earn on scattered pages, or by competitor coverage, and it says which.
Enter your clusters and the page each targets. Anything with impressions and no mapped page is a gap.
Then check competitor coverage for the clusters you have no data on at all. That is a weaker signal and is labelled as such.
It will not tell you whether the topic suits your business. A cluster you could rank for but should not write about is a commercial judgement.
It also cannot estimate what a new page would earn beyond a range from your own click curve.
Gaps evidenced by your own impressions are the strongest: people are already finding you for that intent despite nothing answering it properly.
Gaps evidenced only by competitors are speculative. Treat them as candidates rather than as a plan.
Your own impressions first, competitor coverage second and weaker.
It shows what currently ranks, which usually implies one.
No.
Half an hour on your own figures, and an honest answer about the parts Treepie does not improve.