Do you really need to include 'best' and 'top' in your content to rank for these queries?

How does Google interpret the queries 'best' and 'top' today?

Mueller states that Google no longer relies solely on keyword matching for queries containing 'best' or 'top'. The search engine has developed the ability to understand the underlying intent — a user typing 'best running shoes' is looking for a qualified recommendation, not just a page where the word 'best' appears.

This approach aligns with a broader shift towards natural language processing. Google's algorithms now decode context, synonyms, and the actual purpose behind the query. A page discussing 'recommended running shoes' or 'our favorite models' can rank perfectly without ever mentioning 'best'.

What are these 'external factors' that determine relevance?

Mueller remains intentionally vague on this point. One can reasonably assume he refers to authority and trust signals: quality backlinks, mentions on reference sites, user engagement, bounce rate, time on page. These metrics signal to Google that a page is authoritative on a particular topic.

Named entities likely play a significant role. If your content cites recognized brands, field experts, specific models with their technical characteristics, Google may infer that you are addressing a comparison or recommendation intent — even without the explicit word 'best'.

Does this statement radically change our SEO practices?

Not necessarily. Savvy SEOs have long known that keyword stuffing is counterproductive. What Mueller confirms here is that Google has taken another leap in its contextual understanding. The presence of a keyword is no longer a binary relevance criterion.

That said, completely avoiding these terms would be a tactical error. Semantic coherence remains important for users and for secondary algorithms. If your entire semantic field suggests a comparison, the complete absence of 'best' or 'top' could create dissonance.

• Google evaluates the intent behind the 'best' and 'top' queries, not just the literal presence of the words
• External factors (authority, backlinks, engagement) weigh more heavily than the exact term match
• Semantic processing enables Google to recognize synonyms and contextual variations
• The total absence of these words is not recommended — semantic coherence still matters

Is this statement consistent with field observations?

Yes and no. On one hand, there are indeed well-ranking pages for 'best X' queries that do not contain the word 'best' in their title or H1. These pages compensate with a strong topical authority, a solid link profile, and comprehensive content that clearly answers the comparison intent.

On the other hand, empirical data shows that including the term 'best' in strategic areas (title, meta description, first paragraphs) still correlates with better organic CTR and often better initial positioning. Let’s be honest: Google can understand intent, but an explicit alignment between query and content remains a positive signal.

What nuances should be added to this assertion?

Mueller talks about 'external factors' as if it were obvious, but this wording is misleading. External factors do not completely replace on-page factors — they complement them. A page lacking minimal topical relevance will never rank, regardless of its backlinks.

Moreover, this logic mostly applies to informational and commercial queries. For transactional queries or very specific niches, exact matching can still play a decisive role. Mueller's generalization deserves to be tested on a case-by-case basis. [To be checked] depending on your vertical and level of competition.

What is the real room for maneuver to optimize these queries?

The risk is that this statement encourages a passive approach — 'Google understands intent, so I don’t have to do anything'. Mistake. You need to facilitate the algorithm's work by structuring your content: comparison tables, explicit ratings, 'our verdict' sections, mentions of selection criteria.

Structured data remains an underutilized lever. A Schema.org markup of type ItemList with Products or Reviews can explicitly signal to Google that your page addresses a ranking or recommendation intent. Don’t rely only on the 'magic' of NLP — provide clear cues.

What should you do concretely with your existing 'best' and 'top' content?

Start by auditing your pages ranking for these queries. Use Search Console to identify those that rank without containing the exact terms. Analyze what compensates: content depth, number of backlinks, user engagement, presence of structured data. These pages are case studies for understanding what Google truly values.

Next, strengthen your topical authority signals: expert citations, links to primary sources, transparent selection methodology. Google seeks proof that you have actually tested, compared, evaluated — not just aggregated lists found elsewhere. Generic content without added value is doomed to fail, with or without the word 'best'.

What mistakes to avoid in optimizing these queries?

The first mistake would be to completely remove 'best' or 'top' from your content under the pretext that 'Google no longer needs them'. These words serve a function for the user — they clarify the editorial angle. Their absence can make your value proposition less evident, especially in SERPs where the title and meta are scrutinized in a split second.

The second pitfall: believing that external factors are sufficient. If your content lacks depth, structure, or differentiation, no backlink will save it in the long term. Google can recognize intent, but you still need to respond with excellence. The algorithms detect superficial content, especially on high-commercial-value queries.

How can you verify that your strategy works within this new paradigm?

Implement a detailed tracking of positions by semantic variant. Don’t just monitor 'best running shoes' — also track 'top running shoes', 'recommended running shoes', 'running shoes comparison'. Observe if Google positions you similarly on these variants, which would validate its ability to recognize common intent.

Analyze your engagement metrics in Google Analytics 4: average time on page, scroll depth, interactions with comparison tables. If your pages perform well on these KPIs, it’s a sign that you are addressing user intent — and Google will eventually understand this through behavioral signals. The ranking will naturally follow.

• Audit the ranked pages without the exact keywords to identify compensatory factors
• Strengthen topical authority through transparent methodologies and expert citations
• Structure the content with comparison tables, explicit ratings, and verdicts
• Implement Schema.org structured data (ItemList, Product, Review) to clarify intent
• Track positions on semantic variants to validate Google's intent recognition
• Measure user engagement as a proxy for satisfying search intent