Key Differences Among the Most Commonly Used Keyword Suggestion Tools - Part One

Rigid, unchanging procedures threaten any business activity.
With Internet-enabled and -related enterprises, keeping up with
technological progress is absolutely essential to survival. As
opposed to static (unchanging) websites that are not looking to
strengthen or increase their industry share, any dynamic
(changing) website will have new copy, even new strategies, on
an ongoing basis. Regular, extensive, ongoing keyword research
is not a luxury, but a basic survival tactic.

Understanding how people actually use words, and the
relationships these words have in the context of an Internet
search, is key to threading these words and phrases through the
fabric of your site. Because the Internet is so very dynamic,
with word relationships changing seemingly by the minute, this
is a huge and growing challenge for more and more people and
companies. After all, the Internet is growing into the major
commercial and communication hub of the world. Accurate and
useful keyword suggestion tools - and their intelligent
implantation into business and marketing strategy, are a major
part of the solution.

There are a plethora of keyword suggestion tools available, from
free to cost-based, including NicheBot, Wordtracker,
KeywordDiscovery, SEOBook, and the various Google keyword tools.
In this two-part article, we will consider these tools and the
differences among them. Part one will cover the first three on
the list, while part two will cover the Google tools and
SEOBook's Keyword Suggestion Tool.

Most importantly, perhaps, these tools help you estimate the
relative (rather than absolute) size of the search referral
"market" produced by particular words and phrases. You will
develop a better understanding of what terms appear how often in
search queries, and what other terms are correlated with them,
and how many times they are searched compared to those other
terms. The analytics you develop with the tools will also give
you a good idea of how their suggestions will fare, and provide
a means of understanding "competition levels" for specific words
and phrases.

Naturally, there are differences both large and small among
these keyword analysis/suggestion tools. Google, of course,
compiles its tool data from its own search network of sites and
offers tremendous functionality at low or no cost. The
subscription-based services, such as Wordtracker and
KeywordDiscovery, take advantage of databases of multiple sites
and data that can be assembled, broken down, repurposed and
presented in myriad ways.

Specific Tool Functionality

Wordtracker (http://www.wordtracker.com/) aggregates its keyword
data from the leading meta search engines, primarily Dogpile but
with input from MetaCrawler and others. In Wordtracker's attempts
to mine keyword gold, it will discover how many times a certain
term or phrase shows up in its database of over 316 million
words. This is quite a trick in itself, as English (according to
linguists) has between 600,000 and two million words, depending
upon how we define a "word." It is clear that Wordtracker leaves
no permutation or word-form uncounted, which is a distinct
benefit.

Wordtracker's brain trust asserts that metacrawlers process the
queries of the leading search engines with some precision, and
that the software robots that continuously check site rankings
and such do not interfere with the count. In a different
approach, KeywordDiscovery (http://www.keyworddiscovery.com/)
relies on its global "premium database" of some 4.5 billion
searches based solely on user data, thus diminishing the
distortions inherent in some other strategies.

If you are considering which tool to use, you can still get free
trials of most tools, except that you usually need to provide
contact information, with phone numbers and e-mail addresses
required. There are few ways to use and compare the tools
anonymously, so the next best approach is "meta-analysis," in
which we look at various published third-party reports on the
actual use of these tools.

In a study published last year, one technology writer performed
keyword forecasts for "dog food" with KeywordDiscovery,
Wordtracker and several other programs. Despite using different
original data sets, all of these tools try to supply reliable
estimates of the available search referral traffic without "data
inflation." There are numerous ways to analyze and present the
results.

On average, KeywordDiscovery predicted there would be some 1,088
searches for "dog food" daily, while Wordtracker calculated
the probable search referral market for "dog food" to be about
double that. KeywordDiscovery does have a unique and quite
useful algorithm that considers "seasonality" in its results,
letting you review the seasonality of terms historically, as
monthly estimates or even as a component of annual trends.
Search engine market share is developed, as well.

KeywordDiscovery and Wordtracker results can both be repurposed
to estimate just Google referral traffic or that of any other
major engine. In the tech columnist's example, the Wordtracker
daily estimate for Google's "dog food" search was 1,043, or
almost half of all the "Daily Prediction" information.
KeywordDiscovery had Google accounting for 67 percent of its
"Average Daily" results, thus suggesting that 738 "dog food"
searches would be made in Google every day.

Perhaps this does not seem to be much of an absolute difference,
but when considered over a 30-day period, the difference scaled
up considerably in this particular test. KeywordDiscovery
estimated some 22,000+ "dog food" searches that month, but
Wordtracker projected over 31,000 "dog food" searches for that
same period.

A 'Niche' Player

Nichebot (http://www.nichebot.com/) came on the scene with some
degree of fanfare. It is a complex program, with a tightly
specified methodology that lacks flexibility in some important
ways. On the other hand, it gathers data from more sources than
Wordtracker - leveraging the results from KeywordDiscovery and
Google - and provides a great selection of explanatory videos,
instructive screenshots and excellent "Help" functions.

However, Nichebot recommends a five-step system, which can be
time-consuming and confusing, even for veterans. There are, of
course, some free "quick-dig" tools, including, oddly enough,
Wordtracker and its thesaurus. While it is free to search
Wordtracker via Nichebot, you get only basic counts, and must
pay for a premium search if you wish to see competition data and
the Keyword Effectiveness Index (KEI).

You can dig a bit "deeper" without additional cost by clicking
on a term or phrase in the results, which provides a list of
associated phrases. One savvy forum poster declared that the
primary purpose for using Nichebot is "to find as many keywords
from multiple sources to cover as much territory for the maximum
traffic for your website." In practice, he explained, one can
start "from a broad search and just keep refining, merging,
narrowing in."

The proliferation of "niche" tools and functions would seem to
be a sensible development given Nichebot's name, but the added
functionality comes at a price. For instance, you can get the
addresses of the sites that have the greatest number of
backlinks for a particular term, but the learning curve involved
with this program makes the more arcane data difficult to
develop.

Generally speaking, Nichebot results are excellent, and it
allows better organization of projects and searches via its
folder hierarchy. Further, the program checks your site for
keyword density "red flags" that Google may note (and
disapprove of). As premium search charges kick in a bit early
compared to others, the question for users has to be: Do the
premium charges return enough value to offset the time and money
spent to obtain it?

Time and Tide

While meta-analysis of user comments at a random selection of
forums discloses that they don't find Nichebot particularly
intuitive, it is considered an impressive software achievement.

Even its appearance gives Nichebot the impression that using it
takes time and discipline. While KeywordDiscovery and
Wordtracker can be used in a stream-of-consciousness manner at
times, Nichebot does not lend itself to brainstorming or "fluid"
search styles. This is a direct result, of course, of its having
the power it does. Despite that power, it does have a number of
anomalies that are commonly reported. For one thing, it applies
its vaunted "Jackpot" rating to keywords for which it finds no
competition, even if that is the case because of error or
anomaly.

Finally, a number of users report that advanced searches can get
stuck in a "holding pattern" (in a queue) and take from 15-20
minutes to generate results. With the tide of the Internet
forever washing new waves onto the shore, time is of the
essence. Even though advanced keyword research searches can
return valuable data, it is no stretch to say that many
marketers might consider 20 minutes per keyword tool inquiry to
be a barrier to frequent or consistent use.

Rating the Tools

Wordtracker is easier to use for most people, but the
possibilities are certainly expanded with Nichebot. Doing random
or unassociated searches "by the seat of your pants" is among
Wordtracker's great strengths, but Nichebot works well to focus
your work and helps you take a step-by-step, measured approach.
It can be said that Nichebot can not only return search terms
and numbers, but can actually sub as your defacto keyword
research process. As one user commented at a KEI forum, Nichebot
"takes a lot of the guesswork out [but] getting there is
somewhat painful."

KeywordDiscovery's "9-in-1 tool" approach (check their site,
it's even divided up this way) is popular with many users. It
goes some 10,000 keywords deep and the more you pay the deeper
you can go. Nichebot does provide more information, but it has
that steep learning curve and much harder to learn than the more
"friendly" Wordtracker and KeywordDiscovery.

What works best for you will most likely be a product of trial
and error - and for many will be a combination of the tools.
Because you have to give up more and more personal data to get
the "free trials," however, you may want to let other people's
fingers "do the walking" and continue to do meta-analyses of
others' results. There is a lot of wisdom to be gleaned from
multiple opinions, yet there is nothing like running your own
research your own way. Trust the judgment of tech columnists and
meta-analysts, or acquiesce to giving up some personal
information to see for yourself.

Remember, because of the many search engines and the multitudes
of sources the keyword tools get their numbers from, all of the
results are relative. For starters, check out the most
important, relevant and highly "trafficked" keywords and terms
already associated with your site's content. As we move to Part
Two and consider the Google tools and SEOBook's program
(http://tools.seobook.com/keyword-tools/seobook/), don't
forget that ongoing study, research and testing are the most
fruitful ways to stay abreast of an ever-changing universe of
words – and all their relatives, too.