Confirm each XML sitemap says “Success.”
XML sitemaps that index high priority pages, confirm all URLs are indexed.
How to do this:
Go go the XML sitemaps page.
Click on the XML sitemap to examine.
Page refreshes.
Click on the “Page Indexing” or “Video Page Indexing” link.
Page refreshes.
You’ll see the URLs indexed from the XML sitemap you are examining.
Tips:
For enterprise sites with hundreds of XML sitemaps, identify bellwether XML files to monitor – those replicated across countries, languages or divisions. Since they’re templated, you may be able to skip reviewing hundreds every month.
If the number of indexed pages drops significantly, you can use these reports to help figure out which part of the site is not indexed. This becomes particularly useful if XML sitemaps are bokeh into URLs for a particular directory, country, template, category, business line, etc.
Mobile Core Web Vitals
Mobile Core Web Vitals are the most important for SEO and deserve the most attention. Google also has much higher expectations for these URLs, so this is where you’ll focus most of your Core Web Vitals attention.
This is a report I like developers to see regularly, because you can see how URLs are flipping between the metrics and on which date. This can help you troubleshoot by coordinating these dates with changes on the site, CMS, DAM, network, etc.
Metrics to monitor:
Mobile good URLs.
Mobile poor URLs.
Mobile needs improvement URLs.
The historical chart is great for quick trends, but it’s limited to a short window. For the bigger picture, drop the data into a spreadsheet and build your own chart.
You’ll often find that things look fine now, but 5 or 6 months ago, the metrics were far better – don’t let that slip past you.
Tip: This is a good report for development to see on a regular basis. Consider a regular metrics readout cadence with development to discuss what’s going on and compare it with what they know is happening in releases, server maintenance, third-party code and more.
Why mobile URLs don’t have a ‘good’ Core Web Vitals score
This data explains why particular URLs aren’t considered good by Google. Unfortunately, it doesn’t tell you how to address the problem (that requires you to do a Core Web Vitals audit).
In these metrics, you’ll get:
The count of URLs scoring low in any of the core web vitals audit.
A handy list of example URLs, thoughtfully grouped by Google based on similar issues. Unfortunately it’s not all URLs with similar issues, bit’s enough to help you spot patterns and identify areas for improvement.
Metrics to monitor in this report:
LCP issue: longer than 2.5s (mobile)
LCP issue: longer than 4s (mobile)
CLS issue: more than 0.1 (mobile)
CLS issue: more than 0.25 (mobile)
INP issue: longer than 200ms (mobile)
INP issue: longer than 500ms (mobile)
Developers usually need more than just metrics. They want the full list of URLs with low scores.
Luckily, Google gives you and your devs sample URLs to evaluate, though it’s not the comprehensive list they crave. To dig deeper for more URL examples, tap into the Google Search Console API for more data.
Tips:
Include these in your regular metrics readout with development.
The historical chart is handy for quick trends, but it’s got a short memory. For the full picture, toss the data into a spreadsheet and chart it yourself. Don’t let those historical highs and lows slip into the shadows. Even better if you grap the chart images because your spreadsheet likely won’t have metrics showing day-to-day fluctuations throughout each month.
Desktop Core Web Vitals metrics
This is exactly the same as mobile. Usually, I give this a quick gander, but most of the time is spent on mobile core web vitals metrics.
What is often interesting in the desktop metrics is correlations between metrics improving in desktop, but getting worse on mobile devices. This is a good place for development to figure out why mobile metrics got worse, but desktop improved.
Metrics to monitor:
Desktop Good URLs.
Desktop Poor URLs.
Desktop Needs Improvement URLs.
Why Desktop Core Web Vitals metrics are low
Frankly, this is not a priority for the sites I work on. Not that I never look at them, but in the grand scheme of things we prioritize fixing mobile issues, anticipating that fixing mobile issues will fix desktop issues.
For a few of my B2B enterprise clients, with a primarily desktop-focused audience, we dial up the attention on these metrics to make sure nothing slips through the cracks:
LCP issue: longer than 2.5s (desktop)
LCP issue: longer than 2.5s (desktop)
CLS issue: more than 0.25 (desktop)
CLS issue: more than 0.1 (desktop)
INP issue: longer than 200ms (desktop)
INP issue: longer than 500ms (desktop)
Rich results from Schema
Adding Schema markup to your site unlocks special features that enhance your organic listings, such as breadcrumb links, product information and more.
In Google Search Console, URLs with code intended to trigger these SERP enhancements are tracked in a section called “Enhancements.”
The list of “Enhancements” listed in Google Search Console will vary based, on your site’s setup. Here are the most common enhancements you’ll likely see:
Breadcrumbs.
FAQ.
Review Snippets.
Videos.
Unparsable Structured Data.
Product Snippets.
Merchant Listings.
And more.
Each of these enhancements have a report indicating the number of URLs that are valid, invalid and issues to address.
What’s next?
Now that you have the key Google Search Console metrics, make sure you track them regularly (monthly works best).
Remember to drop these metrics into a spreadsheet. Google’s limited historical data might leave you hanging when you need those insights down the road.
In the next article of this series, I’ll show you a few metrics tucked away in the “settings” section of Google Search Console that few SEOs talk about, but I like to keep an eye on.
Dig deeper: 3 underutilized Google Search Console reports for diagnosing traffic drops
Contributing authors are invited to create content for Search Engine Land and are chosen for their expertise and contribution to the search community. Our contributors work under the oversight of the editorial staff and contributions are checked for quality and relevance to our readers. The opinions they express are their own.