Search Performance Data: ToolkitCreators
Published October 4, 2026 · Data window 2026-09-04 to 2026-10-01 (28 days) · Source: Google Search Console, ToolkitCreators property · By Yongrui Sun
This page publishes the actual search performance data for toolkitcreators.com. We are releasing it because most comparison sites describe their traffic rather than show it, and because the numbers below are more useful to a reader evaluating this site than any claim we could make about our own authority.
Headline numbers
| Metric | Value |
|---|---|
| Total impressions | 6,671 |
| Total clicks | 0 |
| Click-through rate | 0.00% |
| Average position | 65.2 |
| Distinct queries | 832 |
Where the impressions sit
We bucketed every query by the position it averages. The gap between the two right-hand columns is the point of this page.
Coverage: the tables below are built from the 832 query rows Search Console returned. Those rows account for 81.8% of the site's total impressions in this window. Search Console does not itemise every impression by query, so percentages below are shares of the itemised set, while the headline numbers above are site-wide totals. The two do not sum to the same figure, and we would rather say so than quietly mix them.
| Position band | Queries | Share of queries | Impressions | Share of impressions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1-10 | 55 | 6.6% | 142 | 2.6% |
| 11-30 | 42 | 5.0% | 93 | 1.7% |
| 31-50 | 39 | 4.7% | 252 | 4.6% |
| 51-100 | 696 | 83.7% | 4,971 | 91.1% |
| 100+ | 0 | 0.0% | 0 | 0.0% |
What the gap means
6.6% of queries rank in the top 10, but those queries account for only 2.6% of impressions — a gap of 4.0 percentage points. In other words, the queries we win are a small share of impressions. The queries that carry real search volume sit in the 51–100 band, where a page is indexed and matched but effectively invisible.
Two things follow. First, improving click-through rate would do almost nothing: the traffic is not being lost at the click, it is being lost at the rank. Second, the long-tail queries we already win are conversational in shape, which is why we have been expanding FAQ sections on the pages that show them.
Queries ranking in the top 30
| Query | Avg. position | Impressions |
|---|---|---|
| chat gpt prompt toolbox | 8.5 | 13 |
| content analytics tool | 7.3 | 11 |
| toolkitai | 6.6 | 10 |
| what is the best ai image generator for stock photography? | 8.8 | 9 |
| ai website builders | 22.0 | 8 |
| headline tester | 1.0 | 8 |
| content planning tools for social media | 5.0 | 7 |
| social media planning tools | 19.9 | 7 |
Queries with real impressions and no clicks
5 queries have at least 100 impressions and zero clicks in this window. We list the count rather than the queries because a query with traffic and no clicks is usually a sign the page does not answer the question, and that is a defect we would rather fix than publish.
Editor's take
We publish this because a comparison site that will not show its own numbers is asking you to trust a claim it cannot back. The picture here is unflattering by conventional standards: very few clicks, and an average position outside the top 50. It is also more actionable than an aggregate score would be, because it locates the problem precisely.
Method and caveats
- Data comes from the Google Search Console property for toolkitcreators.com, exported October 4, 2026.
- Position is a 28-day average, not a live rank. A query with very few impressions can drop out entirely without the average moving much.
- Search Console sampling means low-volume queries are under-reported; treat the query count as a floor, not a total. The query rows returned cover 81.8% of the window's impressions, which is why query-level subtotals are smaller than the site-wide figures above.
- Headline figures are site-wide totals from a single aggregate query; the per-band and per-query tables are from the itemised query export. We do not blend the two.
- We have not run any experiments to isolate cause. These are observations, not results.