Official statement
Other statements from this video 9 ▾
- □ JavaScript et indexation : Google est-il vraiment capable de tout indexer ?
- □ Le Web Rendering Service de Google suit-il vraiment toutes les dernières fonctionnalités de Chrome ?
- □ Pourquoi Google peine-t-il à indexer correctement les sites qui utilisent des Web Workers ?
- □ Pourquoi les SEO et développeurs doivent-ils absolument travailler ensemble ?
- □ Les core updates de Google sont-elles vraiment des rappels à l'ordre sur les guidelines ?
- □ Les core updates sont-elles vraiment neutres ou cachent-elles des pénalités déguisées ?
- □ Core update : pourquoi Google refuse-t-il de donner des détails spécifiques ?
- □ Les core updates de Google sont-elles vraiment conçues pour améliorer l'expérience utilisateur ou pour redistribuer les positions ?
- □ Pourquoi Google refuse-t-il de révéler ce que contiennent vraiment les core updates ?
John Mueller claims that most websites experience no change in ranking during core updates. Only a minority of sites undergo significant variations. This statement invites a reconsideration of the widespread panic that accompanies each announcement of an algorithm update.
What you need to understand
Why does Google assert that most sites remain stable?<\/h3>
Mueller's statement challenges the common misconception that every core update<\/strong> disrupts all search results. In practice, Google continuously adjusts the weighting of hundreds of signals — and these adjustments only impact sites located in algorithmic friction zones<\/strong>.<\/p> If your site provides solid content, a decent user experience, and consistent authority in its niche, fluctuations will be minor. Affected sites typically already found themselves in grey areas<\/strong>: borderline content, contradictory signals, fragile authority.<\/p> Google never precisely defines this threshold. A shift of 3 positions for a high-traffic query can represent thousands of lost visits — but algorithmically, it is not considered significant<\/strong>.<\/p> Google’s perspective is macro: they observe massive redistributions of visibility, not the micro-variations we scrutinize in our dashboards. What matters to them is that a site does not collapse or explode without a valid reason.<\/p> According to public data from various SEO tools, between 15% and 30% of sites experience notable variations during a core update — which corroborates Mueller’s claim. But be cautious: “most”<\/strong> includes millions of dormant sites, abandoned blogs, and corporate showcases lacking SEO ambition.<\/p> For active sites in competitive niches, the impact rate significantly increases. Thus, the statement remains technically true, but it masks a more nuanced reality on the ground.<\/p>What does Google consider a "significant" change?<\/h3>
Does this stability really concern "most" sites?<\/h3>
SEO Expert opinion
Does this statement align with what we observe on the ground?<\/h3>
Yes and no. If you manage a diverse portfolio of sites, you will indeed notice that the majority remains within a stability range<\/strong> — let’s say ±10% organic traffic. But this average masks polar cases: some sites explode, others collapse.<\/p> The issue is that SEOs do not deal with “the majority of sites.” We work on projects that are precisely trying to gain positions<\/strong> — thus in the turbulence zone. Saying that a core update only affects 20% of sites is like saying a storm only impacts 20% of boats: those that are sailing.<\/p> Because every core update triggers a wave of panic on Twitter, forums, and LinkedIn groups. Thousands of site owners worry while their traffic has not budged an inch. Google aims to defuse this collective anxiety<\/strong>.<\/p> It’s also a way of saying: “If you fall, it’s because your content deserved to drop.” A subtle way to shift the responsibility back to publishers rather than questioning the relevance of algorithm adjustments. [To be verified]<\/strong>: no public data allows us to validate the exact percentage of affected sites — we are navigating in the fog.<\/p> In YMYL<\/strong> (Your Money Your Life) niches, core updates historically have a much more pronounced impact. Health, finance, legal: these sectors experience massive redistributions at each iteration. If you operate in these verticals, Mueller’s assertion is almost off-topic.<\/p> Similarly, sites in rapid growth phases<\/strong> — new domains, recent redesigns, aggressive content strategies — are inherently more volatile. They have not yet reached this “stability” that Google speaks of.<\/p>Why does Google communicate about this “stability”?<\/h3>
When does this rule not apply?<\/h3>
Practical impact and recommendations
What should you do after a core update?<\/h3>
First, stop refreshing Analytics every hour. Wait at least 10 to 14 days<\/strong> to observe a stabilized trend. Fluctuations in the first few days are often noise, not signal.<\/p> If your traffic remains stable: check that this stability is not a masked stagnation<\/strong>. Compare your visibility relative to that of your competitors. If they are progressing and you are not, you are actually going backward.<\/p> If your traffic drops: identify the impacted pages, not the site as a whole. Often, a core update penalizes specific thematic clusters<\/strong>, not the entire domain. Analyze the nature of the affected content: low expertise? Duplication? Lack of depth?<\/p> Don’t rest on your laurels. The absence of movement may reflect an algorithmic glass ceiling<\/strong> — your site has reached its current threshold of trust and will not progress without structural changes.<\/p> Avoid over-interpreting: if your direct competitors drop and you remain stable, you are mechanically gaining market share. But this does not validate the absolute quality of your content — just that it is relatively better<\/strong> than those who have plunged.<\/p> It’s impossible to predict adjustments, but you can strengthen your resilience foundations<\/strong>: thematic diversification, editorial depth, authority demonstrated by external mentions, strong user engagement signals.<\/p> Continuously test. Don’t leave your site on autopilot between updates. Algorithms evolve incrementally — a core update is merely the public crystallization<\/strong> of hundreds of daily micro-adjustments.<\/p>What mistakes should you avoid when not impacted?<\/h3>
How can you anticipate upcoming core updates?<\/h3>
❓ Frequently Asked Questions
Si mon site n'est pas affecté par un core update, dois-je tout de même analyser mes positions ?
Combien de temps faut-il attendre pour mesurer l'impact réel d'un core update ?
Un site peut-il être impacté par un core update des mois après son déploiement ?
Les sites de niche sont-ils moins exposés aux core updates que les gros sites généralistes ?
Faut-il modifier son contenu immédiatement après une chute liée à un core update ?
🎥 From the same video 9
Other SEO insights extracted from this same Google Search Central video · published on 11/01/2022
🎥 Watch the full video on YouTube →Related statements
Get real-time analysis of the latest Google SEO declarations
Be the first to know every time a new official Google statement drops — with full expert analysis.
💬 Comments (0)
Be the first to comment.