I analyzed my last 50 blog posts. Here's what actually moved the needle.
After realizing I'm spending 17hrs/mo on SEO, I went back and analyzed my last 50 blog posts at Eightception.
Tracked: time and effort spent on SEO, traffic after 30 days, and article engagement.
- Long-form comprehensive articles covering a topic from all sides - work amazingly!
- Good topical clusters coverage - works. Google loves expertise in certain topics, not thin coverage of all possible themes.
- Using the phrases they'd search in my H1, H2, and H3.
- Actually publishing, publishing, publishing. Consistently. Show search bots that you are serious about this blog!
- Posts that solve a real problem (even if I ignored or forgot SEO research) - work great.
- Time spent on SEO tools had low correlation with results. Will it be a winner article or not - is still guesswork.
Looks like in 2025, SEO bots are smart enough. They understand the intent and the content; they can see how long people stay on the page and how far they scroll it; they see if readers bookmark the page (Google Chrome) or send it to their friends (Direct Visits).
Forget the keyword stuffing. Re-read the E-E-A-T.
Anyone else found that LESS SEO time spent = better results?
Or am I just lucky?
Trending on Indie Hackers
This is a brilliant analysis, and you’re absolutely not alone in these findings. I've seen the same pattern across the SaaS space.
The key takeaway isn't that SEO is dead,it's that SEO has finally merged fully with Conversion Rate Optimization (CRO).
Your point on 'Posts that solve a real problem' is the entire game now. We saw a 3.2x lift in email RPE recently, and the content that drives that revenue is the content that perfectly anticipates reader intent. If the content truly solves the problem, Google sees it via the engagement signals you mentioned (time on page, low bounce rate, etc.), and they reward it.
The low correlation with time spent on tools is because tools measure volume/competition; they don't measure intent satisfaction.
We essentially flipped our content team to focus 80% on the outcome the reader gets, and 20% on the tactical SEO structure. The results speak for themselves. Great post.
Yassss!!! Thank you.
"The low correlation with time spent on tools is because tools measure volume/competition; they don't measure intent satisfaction."
The vanity metrics, right?
Absolutely! You nailed it,they are the ultimate vanity metrics.
That realization is the fundamental shift from just driving traffic to driving revenue. The $0.82 RPE (Revenue Per Email) we started with on a recent audit was pure vanity traffic; the content wasn't solving the right problem. It took prioritizing intent satisfaction to push that up to $2.63 RPE.
Volume and competition only matter when your conversion is already maximized. If a channel is driving high intent, you pour gas on that. If the intent is low, more traffic just creates more noise.
You've already proven your content can deliver high intent (the long-form comprehensive articles). Now it's just about ensuring every piece of content, especially the email sequence that follows, is engineered to convert that intent into cash flow. That's where the sustainable growth happens.