Why does Google Search Console show positions that don't match actual traffic?

How does Google calculate positions in universal results?

Google has been integrating universal results into its SERPs for several years: image blocks, video carousels, Featured Snippets, News sections, Local Pack. When your site appears in one of these blocks, Search Console records this appearance as a standard organic ranking.

Specifically? If your image appears in position 2 in an image block displayed at the top of the page, GSC records "position 2". But visually, the user may have already scrolled through 3 ads, 10 blue links, and a Featured Snippet. Therefore, your perceived actual position is much lower than what GSC indicates.

Why does this metric create confusion?

SEO practitioners are used to correlating average position and click-through rate according to established CTR curves. A position 3 theoretically generates 10-12% CTR. However, if this position 3 corresponds to an image block buried after 8 other elements, the observed CTR drops to 1-2%.

This distortion skews performance analyses. You might see an improvement in average position in GSC, but traffic stagnates or decreases. The opposite is also true: a poor average position can hide excellent visibility in a highly clicked video carousel.

What types of universal results are affected?

All formats integrated into the classic SERP are counted: image blocks, video carousels, news sections, Local Pack, Featured Snippets, People Also Ask, and partial Knowledge Panels. Each appearance generates a data line in GSC with its own position.

Featured Snippets present a particular case: Google counts position 0, but if you also appear in the standard organic results in position 5, GSC may display a blurred average position between the two.

• GSC position ≠ visual position: a gap of 5 to 10 places is common depending on the type of SERP
• Expected vs observed CTR: never rely on generic CTR curves to evaluate actual performance
• Essential segmentation: filter by type of result in GSC (Images, Videos, Web) to avoid misleading averages
• Featured Snippets: position 0 can coexist with a classic organic position, creating double counting
• Mandatory cross-analysis: always compare GSC with an external SERP tracking tool to validate actual positions

Is this statement consistent with field observations?

Yes, it confirms what practitioners have suspected for a long time. The position/CTR gaps are documented in audits since Google intensified the integration of universal results. E-commerce sites with a strong presence in Google Images, or media in Google News, have always reported flattering average positions but disappointing traffic.

What is missing here is transparency about the relative weight of each type of result in the calculation. Does GSC display a simple average between a position 2 in Images and a position 15 in Web? Or does it weight according to the impression volume of each format? Google does not specify. [To be verified]

What nuances should be added to this rule?

First point: not all universal results are equal in terms of actual visibility. An image block at the top of the mobile SERP easily captures 15-20% CTR. A video carousel buried after 12 blue links generates only 0.5-1% clicks, even in “position 3” according to GSC.

Second nuance: the fragmentation of metrics between Search, Images, and Videos in GSC resolves the problem only in part. The same content can appear simultaneously in multiple tabs, with different positions. Adding these metrics for a consolidated view remains approximate and requires manual processing via the API.

When does this metric become misleading?

Mixed queries (transactional + informational) generate ultra-fragmented SERPs: 4 ads, 1 Local Pack, 1 Featured Snippet, 1 image block, and finally the classic organic results. Your “position 4” in the image block actually means that the user sees your content after 15-20 other elements.

Sites that rank exclusively via alternative formats (YouTube, Google Images) without a presence in standard Web results suffer from an artificial overvaluation of their SEO performance. Dashboards show an average position of 3-5, but the actual traffic corresponds to a position of 15-20.

How to properly audit your actual positions?

First step: segment your GSC data by search type (Web, Images, Videos). Export the main queries from each segment and compare average positions. A gap of more than 5 positions between Web and Images on the same queries signals a strong distortion.

Next, use an external rank tracking tool (SEMrush, Ahrefs, Serpstat) that captures the visual position in the complete SERP, counting all elements (ads, universal blocks). Compare these "visual" positions with those from GSC. A systematic gap of 8-10 places indicates a strong presence in universal results.

What interpretation mistakes should you absolutely avoid?

Never celebrate an increase in average position without checking the associated real traffic. A rise from position 12 to position 6 may simply reflect better presence in a little-clicked image block, without business impact. The CTR is the key metric.

Conversely, don’t panic in the face of a decline in average position if your traffic remains stable or increases. Google may have reorganized the SERP by removing a universal block where you were well positioned, but your classic organic position (the one that generates traffic) hasn’t changed.

How to optimize for universal results without skewing your KPIs?

Create segmented dashboards in GSC or via the API: one for classic Web traffic, one for Images, one for Videos. Track each channel with its own CTR benchmarks. Never mix these metrics into a single "overall average position" indicator.

For visual content (e-commerce, media), specifically optimize for Google Images: rich alt tags, lightweight files, ImageObject structured data, image sitemaps. But track this traffic separately and do not integrate it into your classic organic positioning goals.

• Segment GSC by search type (Web/Images/Videos) from the start of each analysis
• Always systematically cross-check GSC with an external rank tracker that counts the actual visual position
• Never evaluate SEO performance solely on average position: CTR and absolute traffic are paramount
• Identify queries with a strong position/CTR gap and manually investigate the SERP
• Create distinct dashboards for each type of universal result with appropriate CTR benchmarks
• Document changes in SERP layout (addition/removal of universal blocks) to contextualize position variations