How to Know If You Can Rank (Before You Write a Single Word)

I'm going to tell you something that will save you hundreds of hours and thousands of dollars: most of the content you're thinking about creating has no chance of ranking. Zero. You could write the best piece ever written on that topic, optimize it perfectly, build links to it for years, and it still wouldn't crack the top ten.

Not because you're bad at SEO. Because you picked a fight you can't win. Sun Tzu understood this: the supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting. In SEO terms, that means choosing battles where victory is possible.

The good news is that you can figure this out before you start. Before you write a single word. Before you spend a single dollar. You can look at a keyword, do about fifteen minutes of analysis, and know with reasonable confidence whether you have a realistic shot or whether you're wasting your time.

This is that process. Not the simplified version. Not the "just check keyword difficulty" nonsense. The actual process that actually works.

Why Keyword Difficulty Scores Are Worthless

Let's start by burning down the conventional wisdom.

Every SEO tool has a keyword difficulty score. Ahrefs has one. Semrush has one. Moz has one. They all show you a number from 0 to 100, and the implicit promise is that this number tells you how hard it will be to rank.

It doesn't. It can't. Here's why.

Keyword difficulty scores are calculated by looking at who currently ranks and measuring their backlink profiles. The theory is that if the current top ten all have strong backlink profiles, the keyword must be hard to rank for.

This theory is wrong in multiple ways.

First, backlinks aren't the only factor that determines rankings. They're not even the most important factor anymore for most queries. Content relevance, topical authority, user engagement, brand recognition, and dozens of other signals all matter. A keyword difficulty score that only looks at backlinks is measuring one variable in a multivariate equation. You wouldn't predict the weather by measuring only barometric pressure.

Second, the scores don't account for your specific situation. A keyword that's "hard" for a new site might be easy for an established authority in that niche. A keyword that's "easy" based on backlinks might be impossible if Google has decided that only certain types of sites should rank for it. The difficulty is relative to who you are, not absolute.

Third, these scores are calculated at a point in time and become stale almost immediately. The SERP landscape changes constantly. New competitors emerge. Old pages decay. Algorithm updates shuffle the deck. A difficulty score from last month might be meaningless today.

I've seen keywords with difficulty scores of 80+ where a new site ranked in the top three within months. I've seen keywords with difficulty scores of 20 where established sites couldn't crack the top fifty after years of trying. The scores are noise masquerading as signal, and mistaking one for the other is how you go broke.

So throw them out. We're going to do this properly.

The Only Analysis That Matters: Reading the SERP

Here's the secret that should be obvious but apparently isn't: Google is already telling you exactly who can rank for any given keyword. The answer is right there on the search results page. You just have to know how to read it.

Search for your target keyword. Don't use any tools. Just Google it. Look at the results. Actually look at them. What you're seeing isn't random. It's Google's explicit statement about what kind of content, from what kind of sources, satisfies this particular query.

Your job is to decode that statement and figure out whether you fit the pattern.

Step 1: What Types of Sites Are Ranking?

Look at the domains in positions one through ten. Not the pages. The domains. What kinds of sites are these?

Are they major publications? (New York Times, Forbes, CNN)

Are they giant platforms? (Wikipedia, Reddit, Quora, YouTube)

Are they established authorities in the niche? (WebMD for health, Investopedia for finance)

Are they e-commerce giants? (Amazon, major retailers)

Are they niche blogs and smaller sites?

Are they tools or apps rather than content sites?

This tells you something crucial: what type of entity Google believes should answer this query.

If the top ten is all major publications and Wikipedia, Google is saying "this query should be answered by highly authoritative, well-known sources." A small site isn't going to break in there regardless of content quality because Google has decided that source authority is essential for this query.

If the top ten is a mix of niche blogs and smaller sites, Google is saying "this query is best answered by specialists, and source authority is less important than content relevance." A small site that creates exceptional content has a real shot.

If the top ten is dominated by e-commerce sites, Google is saying "this is a transactional query where people want to buy things." A content site probably can't rank here at all because the intent is commercial, not informational.

If Reddit or Quora is ranking prominently, Google is saying "users want authentic, experience-based answers from real people, not polished content from publishers." This is actually an opportunity signal because it suggests Google isn't finding great dedicated content.

Be honest with yourself about what type of site you have and whether it matches what Google is showing preference for. If there's a mismatch, you're fighting against Google's intent classification, and that's a fight you'll probably lose.

Step 2: What Types of Content Are Ranking?

Now look at the actual pages, not just the domains. What format is the content in?

Are they long-form comprehensive guides? (3000+ words covering everything)

Are they short, direct answers? (Quick definitions or explanations)

Are they listicles? (Top 10 this, 15 best that)

Are they how-to tutorials with steps?

Are they comparison pages?

Are they product pages?

Are they videos?

Are they tools or calculators?

Whatever format dominates the SERP is what Google has determined users want for this query. You need to match that format or have an extremely good reason to believe you can provide something better in a different format.

I see people make this mistake constantly. They want to rank for a keyword where the top ten is all product pages, so they create a blog post. They want to rank for a keyword where the top ten is all comprehensive guides, so they create a short listicle. They're bringing the wrong weapon to the fight.

Match the format. If everyone ranking has 3000-word guides, you need a 3000-word guide (probably a better one). If everyone ranking has comparison tables, you need comparison tables. If everyone ranking has video content, you might need video content.

The exception is when you see a genuine format gap. Sometimes Google is ranking suboptimal content formats because nothing better exists. If everyone ranking has thin, poorly written listicles and you create the definitive comprehensive guide, you might win. But be very careful with this logic. Usually Google is showing you what works because it's what works, not because it's the only option.

Step 3: How Good Is the Content That's Currently Ranking?

This is where it gets interesting. Open the top five results. Actually read them. Not skim. Read.

Ask yourself honestly:

Is this content good? Is it well-written, well-organized, comprehensive, accurate, and genuinely helpful?

Or is it mediocre? Thin, outdated, poorly structured, missing obvious information, or clearly written to rank rather than to help?

The quality of the current top results tells you about the competitive bar. If the top five are all exceptional, the bar is high and you'll need to be exceptional too. If the top five are mediocre, there's an opportunity to win by simply being better.

But be careful here. Your standards for "good" might not match Google's. What you think is comprehensive might be more than users actually want. What you think is well-written might be less accessible than what's actually ranking. Strunk and White would remind you: clarity beats cleverness. Don't assume that the current top results are bad just because you don't like them. They're ranking for a reason, and the reason might not be obvious to you.

The safest interpretation: if the current top results seem genuinely excellent, assume they are and plan accordingly. If they seem genuinely weak, you might have found an opportunity.

Step 4: The Authority Gap Analysis

Now we get to the part where we actually use tools, but not the way you're used to.

Pull up Ahrefs or Semrush or whatever you have. Look at the domain authority (or domain rating, or authority score, whatever your tool calls it) for the top ten ranking domains. Also look at the number of referring domains to each specific ranking page.

Now look at your own domain's metrics.

I told you keyword difficulty scores are garbage, and they are. But comparative authority analysis is useful. Not because these metrics perfectly predict rankings, but because they give you a rough sense of the competitive landscape.

If your domain rating is 30 and everyone in the top ten is above 70, you have an authority gap. Closing that gap is possible but takes time and resources. Your content will need to be significantly better to overcome the authority disadvantage.

If your domain rating is comparable to what's ranking, authority isn't your problem. The competition is more about content quality and relevance.

If your domain rating is higher than what's ranking, you have an authority advantage. All else being equal, you should be able to rank with content that's as good or slightly better than the current top results.

Also look at the referring domains to the specific pages ranking. If the top result has 500 referring domains to that specific page, someone somewhere decided that page was important enough to link to 500 times. You'll either need to earn comparable links or win through other factors.

If the top results have very few page-level links, links aren't the deciding factor for this SERP. Content and domain authority matter more.

Step 5: The Topical Authority Question

This is the factor most people miss, and it's increasingly important.

Google doesn't just evaluate pages. It evaluates whether sites have demonstrated expertise in a topic area. A site that has published a hundred quality articles about personal finance will rank more easily for a new personal finance article than a site that has never covered the topic before.

Look at the sites ranking in positions one through five. Go to their domains. How much other content do they have on this topic and related topics?

If the top results all come from sites with massive topical coverage (hundreds of articles in the same category), topical authority is a factor. You'll either need comparable coverage or need to build it over time by creating lots of related content, not just one piece targeting the specific keyword.

If the top results come from sites with minimal topical coverage (the ranking page is one of only a few they have on the topic), topical authority isn't a major factor. You can potentially rank with a single excellent piece.

Now look at your own site. How much content do you have in this topic area? If the answer is "none," you're starting from a topical authority disadvantage. You might win anyway if other factors favor you, but you're climbing uphill.

Step 6: The Search Intent Alignment Check

Search intent is one of those SEO concepts that everyone talks about but few people actually apply rigorously. Here's how to do it properly.

Look at the SERP as a whole, including the features Google shows. Featured snippets, People Also Ask boxes, knowledge panels, image carousels, video results, shopping results, local packs. What's present tells you what Google thinks users want.

If there's a featured snippet showing a definition, Google believes users want a quick, direct answer. Your content needs to provide that answer clearly and early.

If there's a People Also Ask section, Google believes users have follow-up questions. Your content should probably address those questions.

If there are video results embedded in the main SERP (not just in a video tab), Google believes some users want video content. Video might be necessary to fully capture this keyword.

If there's a shopping carousel, Google believes this query has commercial intent even if it looks informational. Pure informational content might struggle because users actually want to buy something.

If there's a local pack, Google believes users want local results. National or global content might be deprioritized.

The SERP features are Google showing you their model of what users want. If your content plan doesn't align with that model, you're fighting the algorithm's intent classification.

Step 7: The Brand Bias Assessment

This is uncomfortable but necessary: for some queries, Google has a preference for known brands that you can't overcome with content quality.

Look at the top ten results. How many of them are household names or well-known brands in the space? Count them.

If eight or more of the top ten are major brands, Google has essentially decided that brand recognition is a ranking factor for this query. Users want results from names they recognize and trust. A small, unknown site faces an uphill battle not because of content quality or authority metrics, but because of brand bias.

This is especially true for YMYL queries (Your Money Your Life): anything related to health, finance, legal matters, or news. Google has explicitly stated they want authoritative, trusted sources for these queries. Being unknown is a disadvantage that's hard to overcome.

If the top ten includes several smaller or less famous sites, brand bias isn't a major factor. You can compete on merit.

Putting It All Together: The Decision Framework

After doing this analysis, you have the information you need to make a realistic assessment. Here's how to think about it.

Green light (you can probably rank):

• The types of sites ranking match your type of site
• The content format aligns with what you can create
• The current top content is mediocre or obviously improvable
• Your authority is comparable to or better than what's ranking
• You have existing topical coverage, or topical authority isn't a factor
• Your content plan aligns with the search intent signals
• Brand bias isn't locking out smaller sites

If most of these boxes are checked, you have a real shot. Create the best possible content and see what happens.

Yellow light (proceed with caution):

• Some factors favor you, but others don't
• You'd need to be significantly better than what's ranking to overcome your disadvantages
• There's uncertainty about whether your site type matches what Google wants

If you're in the yellow zone, you can try, but set realistic expectations. You might rank on page two or three. You might rank eventually after building more authority. You might not rank at all. Don't bet your entire strategy on keywords in the yellow zone.

Red light (you probably can't rank):

• The types of sites ranking don't match your site type at all
• Major brands dominate and you're unknown
• The current content is excellent and from high-authority sources
• You have no topical authority and would be starting from zero
• The search intent doesn't match what you can or want to create

If multiple red flags are present, walk away. I know this is hard advice. That keyword might have great search volume. It might be exactly what your business is about. But wanting to rank doesn't mean you can rank. Pursuing keywords you can't win is how you waste years of effort.

When to Attack Anyway

I've painted a picture of careful analysis and realistic assessments. But I should also tell you when to ignore all of this and attack anyway.

When the keyword is core to your business and there's no alternative. Some keywords you simply have to try for because they're fundamental to your market. Even if the odds are long, not being present at all is worse than being on page two.

When you have a genuine unfair advantage. Maybe you have access to data nobody else has. Maybe you have expertise that's truly unique. Maybe you have distribution channels that can generate signals other sites can't match. Genuine advantages can overcome unfavorable SERP dynamics.

When you're playing the long game. Today you might not be able to rank. But if you build topical authority, earn links, grow your brand, and improve your domain strength over years, keywords that are impossible now might become possible later. Sometimes you create content knowing it won't rank immediately but positioning it to rank eventually.

When the SERP is visibly in flux. Sometimes you'll see a SERP where the results feel unstable. Different results on different days. New sites appearing and disappearing. This suggests Google hasn't settled on who should rank, and aggressive entry might catch a wave.

The Fifteen Minute Version

If you've made it this far, you understand the full framework. But in practice, you don't always need to go this deep. Here's the fast version for quick decisions:

1. Google your keyword (2 minutes)

2. Ask: Do sites like mine appear in the top ten? (1 minute)

3. Ask: Is the content format something I can match? (1 minute)

4. Open the top three results, assess quality quickly (5 minutes)

5. Check your domain authority vs theirs in your SEO tool (2 minutes)

6. Make a gut call: green, yellow, or red? (1 minute)

Fifteen minutes, sometimes less. That's all it takes to avoid wasting months on keywords you were never going to rank for.

The Real Skill

I want to leave you with something that goes beyond process.

The real skill here isn't following a checklist. It's developing intuition. After you've analyzed hundreds of SERPs, you start to see patterns instantly. You look at a search results page and you just know whether there's an opportunity or not. You can feel the difference between a SERP that's locked up by giants and one where a newcomer could break in.

This intuition can't be taught directly. It has to be developed through repetition. Ericsson's research on deliberate practice applies here: expertise comes from focused, purposeful repetition with feedback. Every time you analyze a SERP carefully, you're training your pattern recognition. Every time you see whether your predictions were right or wrong, you're calibrating your intuition.

Eventually you won't need fifteen minutes. You'll need fifteen seconds. And that efficiency advantage compounds: while your competitors are creating content for keywords they can't win, you're focusing all your energy on keywords where you have a real shot.

That's the game. Not finding keywords. Finding winnable keywords. The difference between those two things is everything.