Keyword vs. Keywords plus GEO

[HoosierBuff]

I could be wrong on this, but, it seems true:

The conventional wisdom is that <keyword> will have more search volume than <keyword + <local geo>>, yet, if I look at like semrush, the highest ranking sites only rarely see substantial traffic for <keyword>.

Take for example, "Dive shop". We can't tell how much "dive shop" volume there is in Denver, but, conventional wisdom says there usually is more volume for "dive shop" than "Dive shop Denver", yet, when I look at the #1 ranked Dive shop in Denver, you do not see any keywords WITHOUT geo modifiers.

I feel like I see this time and time again. Is this a limitation in the 3rd party data, or, is keyword + GEO more volume than I thought, OR, is there substantially more local intent and substantially higher click thru rate with the GEO included (I'm sure there is some, but, shouldn't be that much).

Admittedly, I don't have too much data here, and this is more of a feeling, but, I feel I see this trend from time to time.

 

[JoyHawkins]

Stay tuned - we are actually going to do a study on this. The best way to track this is inside Search Console which keywords get clicks (vs just seeing search volume).

Generally speaking, <geo+keyword> gets a higher conversion rate & click-through-rate, but lower volume.