How to Do a Market Evaluation for SEO

When we kick off with a new client, one of the first questions is almost always, "How long is this going to take?" The honest answer is usually "it depends," followed by something like "three to six months and we should see results."

But let's be real: that range is pretty arbitrary. Maybe it's the average, but a lot of context and accuracy gets lost inside an average. So instead of guessing, here is a quick, simple way to grab some real numbers, the kind of measurable benchmarks you can use as goals, and forecast far more accurately.

Start by benchmarking what you are up against

This isn't about producing one absolute score. It's about understanding the shape of the gap between you and the competition. Is it a small gap, a huge gap, or are you neck and neck, where a few improvements would let you pull away from the pack?

That read changes how you talk to a client and how you set the strategy. A small gap is something you attack right away. A big gap just means a particular goal needs more runway and a longer track.

You do not have to catch up to compete

Here's the mindset that matters most. Say you're looking at a local business, and a couple of competitors have around 200 reviews while your client has 20. They have ten times what you do. It can feel hopeless, and it's easy to accidentally make it sound hopeless to a client.

Don't. You do not need to hit exactly 200 reviews to become competitive. We fight this on multiple fronts at once. The big gaps become long-term projects, and the smaller gaps are ones we can often close entirely, and quickly.

The five things to measure

These are the quick, grabbable numbers that tell you where you stand. This example focuses on a local business, but the method works for a national brand too: just drop the local-only metrics and swap in others.

• Authority. Keep it simple with Ahrefs Domain Rating, plus the number of referring domains. If you want to go one step further, look at link velocity too.
• Reviews. Count Google Reviews. For a local client, it's also worth checking other third-party review platforms and any high-relevance industry sites.
• Social strength. Look at follower counts. You can track the single most popular platform per business, or loosely aggregate across platforms to get a directional number.
• Footprint. Grab the number of ranking keywords and the number of pages on the site, to see how wide a net each competitor is casting.

One caution on footprint: more pages and keywords don't automatically mean a competitor is winning more business. A lot of those pages could be off-topic and doing nothing for them. These numbers are directionally useful, not a verdict.

Turn the gaps into a timeline

Once you have the numbers, you size each gap and do a little math. To do that, you need a realistic monthly pace for each metric. Here are reasonable starting estimates you can adjust to your own experience:

• Reviews: about 4 per month on the lower end.
• Referring domains: about 2 per month with an active backlink program.
• Domain Rating: roughly 1 point per month (honestly a lofty target, so adjust down if needed).
• Content pages: at least 2 published per month.
• Ranking keywords: about 20 per month if you're publishing twice a month and earning links.

With a pace attached to each metric, the projection is simple arithmetic. I use a small spreadsheet that runs this for every metric automatically:

Months to close = (your target − where you are now) ÷ monthly pace.

The target is usually the "pack floor," the lowest competitor number, because you don't have to beat the leader to get competitive. That single equation turns a vague "three to six months" into a specific, defensible set of timelines per front.

A word of caution on timelines

I'd much rather focus on progress than the calendar. Have we been publishing consistently? Has the client been quick on approvals? Those actions are what make the graph go up and to the right. Use the timeline as a planning tool, and always pair it with the work required to hit it.

When a gap looks impossible

Sometimes this exercise surfaces a number that looks daunting, the kind that makes you think "I could never close that." When that happens, two moves help:

• Lower the target. Go after longer-tail, niche keywords where the competition isn't as fierce. Almost every site has a pocket of keyword territory where it can win. Get in there first, then build out.
• Lead with the fronts you can win now. Attack the smaller gaps and shorter timelines first, and frame the bigger gaps as a longer parallel track.

A live example: a plumber in Austin

Let's walk it. I searched the client's primary keyword (plumber in Austin, Texas), picked a fictional client called Beyond Wow, and used the other two businesses in the map pack as competitors. Here's how the benchmarks came out.

Authority. The client's Domain Rating was 25, against competitors at 34 and 35. Measured to the pack floor of 34, that's a gap of 9. On referring domains, the client had 461 versus 626 for the competitor floor, a gap of 165 links to build.

Reviews. The client had about 2,500 reviews. Competitors had roughly 17,000 and 2,900. Because we aim at the pack floor of 2,900, the real gap is only about 400 reviews, significant but very catchable with a dedicated review campaign.

Footprint. The client ranked for 237 keywords across roughly 40 pages. One competitor had 523 keywords on 128 pages. The other had 1,300 keywords on just 117 pages.

That last number is exactly the kind of thread this exercise hands you. A competitor ranking for far more keywords with fewer pages is worth investigating. How are they being so efficient? That's a lead to chase, not just a stat to record.

Reading it all together, the plan of attack writes itself: backlinks and reviews are the long fronts, and content is a clear push given the keyword-and-page comparison. The shorter gaps, like Domain Rating, are where you show early wins.

The bottom line

That's a market evaluation you can run in minutes. It tells you where the client really stands, which lines of attack to prioritize, and lets you make far more reasonable projections than a guessed-at "three to six months."