\n\n\n<\/p>\n \n\n\n\n<\/p>\n Built within these scores is an implicit assumption that the higher your score, the higher you\u2019ll likely rank on Google.<\/p>\n \n\n<\/p>\n But is that actually true?<\/p>\n \n\n<\/p>\n To find out, I studied the correlation between rankings and content scores from five content optimization tools: Surfer, Frase, NeuronWriter, Clearscope, and our own AI Content Helper.<\/p>\n \n\n<\/p>\n We found weak correlations everywhere. <\/strong><\/p>\n \n\n<\/p>\n But out of the five tools I tested, <\/strong>NeuronWriter and AI Content Helper fared the best. The other three only had very weak correlations.<\/p>\n \n\n<\/p>\n \n\n\n\n<\/p>\n At first glance, these numbers may seem underwhelming. But \u2018weak\u2019 doesn\u2019t mean \u2018useless\u2019.<\/p>\n \n\n<\/p>\n Google uses hundreds of ranking signals to determine how pages rank. While correlation may not be causation, even a weak positive correlation means content scores can still move the needle.<\/p>\n \n\n<\/p>\n Especially when it\u2019s a factor you directly control.<\/p>\n \n\n<\/p>\n Imagine if you had a button you could press that would give you a 10% chance of improving your rankings by one or two places. Would you press it?<\/p>\n \n\n<\/p>\n I would spam the hell out of that button.<\/p>\n \n\n<\/p>\n These tools are inexpensive, and you can use them to generate a positive impact on your rankings. It\u2019s a massive, massive win for our industry.<\/p>\n![\"Ahrefs'](\"https:\/\/ahrefs.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/05\/ahrefs-ai-content-helper.png\")
<\/figure>\n![\"Correlations](\"https:\/\/ahrefs.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/05\/correlations-between-google-rankings-and-content-s.png\")
<\/figure>\n