Every existing case study on this site describes an engagement in narrative form. This one is different on purpose: it's the raw, verified data itself, platform, timeframe, clicks, impressions, CTR, and position or authority score, pulled directly from Google Search Console and Semrush across twelve real, anonymised engagements. Company names and identifying specifics are withheld per client confidentiality, industry and general market are shown since that context matters for reading the numbers honestly.
The Search Console Results
Real Google Search Console results, 9 engagements (anonymised, industry + market shown)
| Engagement | Timeframe | Clicks | Impressions | CTR | Avg. Position |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cardiology clinic, Bangladesh | Aug 2024-Feb 2025 (~6mo) | 22,000 | 525,000 | 4.2% | 8.0 |
| News media, Congo | Nov 2024-Feb 2025 (~3mo) | 5,700 | 205,000 | 2.8% | 17.6 |
| Travel agency, Dubai | Jun 2024-Feb 2025 (~7.5mo) | 1,360 | 11,000 | 12.4% | 15.7 |
| E-commerce, Bangladesh/Philippines | Feb 2024-Feb 2025 (~1yr) | 2,100 | 134,000 | 1.6% | 15.5 |
| Dentist clinic, Netherlands | Apr 2024-Feb 2025 (~9.5mo) | 123 | 1,260 | 9.8% | 38.2 |
| Web design agency, Netherlands | Sep 2024-Feb 2025 (~5.5mo) | 23 | 2,160 | 1.1% | 65.0 |
| E-commerce (French), Quebec | 6mo vs. prior 6mo | 5,450 (was 1,620, +236.4%) | 30,900 (was 36,600, -15.6%) | 17.6% (was 4.4%) | 16.7 (was 19.2) |
| E-commerce, Montreal | Sep 2024-Feb 2025 (~5.5mo) | 3,840 | 185,000 | 2.1% | 27.3 |
| Foot clinic, Cincinnati | 6mo vs. prior 6mo | 11,600 (was 24,700, -53.0%) | 985,000 (was 1.48M, -33.4%) | 1.2% (was 1.7%) | 22.7 (was 17.9) |
The Domain Authority Results (Semrush)
Real Semrush Domain Overview results, 3 engagements
| Engagement | Authority Score | Organic Traffic/mo | Keywords | Backlinks | Referring Domains |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Photo studio, New York | 6 | 154 (+2,980%) | 45 | 45 | 27 |
| Handicraft e-commerce, US market | 20 | 2,100 (+8.8%) | 952 | 876 | 358 |
| Photographer, Lebanon | 7 | 11 (-79%) | 15 | 32 | 24 |
Reading These Honestly, Including the Two That Didn't Improve
Ten of these twelve show real growth, several of them substantial. Two don't, a foot clinic client saw clicks decline 53% and impressions decline 33.4% over a six-month comparison window, and a photographer's site saw organic traffic drop 79%. I'm including both here rather than quietly leaving them out, because a results page that only ever shows wins isn't giving you an honest picture of what real SEO work actually looks like across a real client portfolio. Rankings move in both directions, competitors improve, algorithms shift, and a single engagement's trajectory isn't guaranteed by the existence of a strategy, it's a real, ongoing effort against a moving competitive landscape.
What's consistent across the ten that did grow is worth noting too: the French-language Quebec e-commerce result shows exactly the kind of pattern I look for and explain in why CTR improvement matters as much as raw impressions, clicks grew 236.4% even as impressions actually dropped 15.6%, because CTR nearly quadrupled from 4.4% to 17.6%. That's not a volume story, it's a relevance and query-matching story, the kind of improvement that comes from better-targeted content and clearer search intent alignment, not just publishing more.
What This Data Does and Doesn't Prove
This shows real, verifiable search performance outcomes across a genuine client portfolio. It does not show agency-side MRR or margin, that's a different metric covered honestly, with its own limitations clearly stated, in the ghost-partnership revenue walkthrough. And it doesn't claim every engagement here specifically used AI-search or AEO/GEO tactics, several predate that being the primary focus, they're organic and technical SEO results, shown as exactly that.
Frequently Asked Questions
Why show engagements where results declined? Direct answer: Because leaving them out would make this page dishonest by omission. Real client portfolios include both directions, and a page claiming to show "real, verified results" that quietly excludes the ones that didn't work isn't actually showing real results, it's showing a curated highlight reel. Why are company names not included? Direct answer: Client confidentiality. Every engagement here is delivered under NDA in some form, industry and general market are shown because that context is genuinely useful for interpreting the numbers, specific business identity isn't disclosed. Are these results typical, or best-case examples? Direct answer: They're the actual, unfiltered set from real Search Console and Semrush reporting, not selected to be representative or to be impressive, this is what verified reporting across these specific engagements actually shows. Why do some show absolute numbers and others show percentage change? Direct answer: Reported the way the underlying data was actually pulled, some as a single-period snapshot, others as an explicit before/after comparison. I kept the format each was actually measured in rather than forcing everything into one shape. Does this replace the agency-side MRR case study? Direct answer: No, they measure different things. This shows client-side search performance; the MRR walkthrough addresses agency-side revenue economics specifically, and stays honestly framed as illustrative since I don't have one verified agency's exact internal MRR figures to report as fact.If you want to see what verified reporting looks like for your own site's situation, not a projection, book a strategy call.