Greogrid Accuracy

[shelbykoch]

Does anyone have any insight on what service has the most accurate geogrids? We've always used Local Viking but have seen talk about some services not being accurate. Are there others that anyone recommends?

 

[JeffClevelandTN]

Hi Shelby! We use Brightlocal but other forum members love Places Scout. I believe both offer free trials . Tagging @Jenny_BrightLocal too.

 

[Jenny_BrightLocal]

Thanks for the tag @JeffClevelandTN

@shelbykoch Feel free to register for a free trial to get a feel for BrightLocal's Local Search Grid. In terms of accuracy, the tool reflects the results that Google returns to us. If you need any help or are stuck, our amazing support team are on hand.

 

[shelbykoch]

Thanks for the tag @JeffClevelandTN

@shelbykoch Feel free to register for a free trial to get a feel for BrightLocal's Local Search Grid. In terms of accuracy, the tool reflects the results that Google returns to us. If you need any help or are stuck, our amazing support team are on hand.

Thanks, Jenny. I did sign up for the trial and after running the report do see that the results are slightly different than Local Viking.

 

[Jenny_BrightLocal]

Yes, you might find that results differ between tools. Essentially the way that each tool is built will be different. They might use different parameters, for example, running reports at different times, grid points may be in slightly different places.

Our help center article (below) explains more, but ultimately it's the trends you see in the reports that can help you make your next steps.

Hopefully that explains a little more as to why you're seeing what you're seeing.

https://help.brightlocal.com/hc/en-...lts-I-see-in-similar-tools-from-other-brands-

 

[Lahsa H.]

Does anyone have any insight on what service has the most accurate geogrids? We've always used Local Viking but have seen talk about some services not being accurate. Are there others that anyone recommends?

I have been using Local Viking for the last 3 years. Please, can you share what exactly people say is wrong with data from LV? Now i want to double check it on my side

 

[stankolev]

Basically, you have two options to get the results:

• Scrape
• Use the Google Places API.

The Google Places API is very expensive. It starts at ~0.03$ per request, which means that the tool would have to pay 3.63$ for a 11x11 grid. And this is for one keyword and one scan. If you add some profit for the tool provider, you can understand why nobody is using the API.

The other option is to scrape Google Maps results. Here, you have many variables that can differ between providers. For example, to fake the location, you need to calculate the altitude, for which you need the Earth's radius. Different providers may use different numbers for the Earth's radius (+-10 km), which can produce different results.

There are different formulas to calculate latitude and longitude, different ways to fake location, and different zoom levels to use. Some are using circles, some are avoiding water and so on. Every small difference can produce different results.


The main point is that the Earth is not flat, and consistency is the important part.

 

[keyserholiday]

PlacesScour has the best and most accurate data. They also have a lot of other features that make it worth the price tag.

 

[shelbykoch]

I have been using Local Viking for the last 3 years. Please, can you share what exactly people say is wrong with data from LV? Now i want to double check it on my side

I had just seen some talk from other sites but they could just be to make you try out their service instead. I did sign up for the bright local trial and so far from what I can tell the results are a little different. The averages are very close but the actual dots have some differences. From what I can tell too bright local offers some more insights on who is ranking and competitors.

Here's the same company and same keyword -
LV - https://static.md/a6d3351294d9749791c2deca5bcf3e57.png
Brightlocal - https://static.md/e96bbf977dff0ac32f3203b89a3c72a6.png