Eight Overlooked Reasons Why Sites Lose Rankings After Google Core Updates

Google's core algorithm updates often leave website owners scrambling to understand why their rankings suddenly dropped. New research reveals that ranking losses frequently stem from misunderstood factors rather than actual site problems, according to SEO expert Roger Montti in a recent analysis of post-update ranking patterns.

These overlooked reasons for ranking fluctuations can help SEO professionals better diagnose what's happening when sites lose visibility after a core update. Understanding these factors is crucial for developing effective recovery strategies rather than making potentially harmful changes to fix nonexistent issues.

How Google Really Evaluates Your Content

Many site owners mistakenly believe ranking drops indicate Google has identified new problems with their website. However, the reality is often more nuanced.

"If the site was previously ranking well and now it doesn't, it could be what I call 'it's ranking where it's supposed to rank,'" explains Montti. "Some part of Google's algorithm has caught up to a loophole that the page was intentionally or accidentally taking advantage of."

This perspective shift is important – what appears to be a penalty may simply be Google's algorithms becoming more precise at evaluating content quality and relevance. The core update didn't necessarily find new problems; it just closed gaps that previously allowed certain pages to rank higher than they should have.

Topic Theming and Relevance Evolution

One of the most significant yet overlooked factors is how Google's understanding of topical relevance continues to evolve. The search engine increasingly categorizes content by knowledge domains and expertise levels.

This became evident during the 2018 "Medic Update" when many alternative health websites permanently lost rankings for medical search terms. Google had refined its understanding of what constitutes medical expertise versus folk remedies, effectively sorting content into distinct topical categories.

Montti references a patent called "Website representation vector" that describes Google's ability to classify websites by knowledge domains. For example, when a user searches for a medical condition, Google may now prioritize websites authored by medical experts rather than alternative health sources, regardless of other ranking factors.

The practical implication is clear: "If your page was previously ranking and now it isn't, then it's possible that the topical theme was redefined more sharply," notes Montti.

Understanding how Google's approach to SEO continues to evolve is essential for maintaining rankings through algorithm updates. Sites that fail to keep pace with these changes often experience sudden visibility drops after core updates.

Beyond Technical SEO: The Human Element

Another frequently overlooked aspect of ranking drops involves what Montti calls "optimization for people" – the subtle elements that make users genuinely connect with a website.

"Nobody loves a site because it's heavily SEO'd, but people do love sites that acknowledge the site visitor in some way," he explains. "This is the secret sauce that's invisible to SEO tools but helps sites outrank their competitors."

Examples include:

• Trust signals like "Trusted by over 200 Fortune 500 companies"
• Images that reflect the actual audience demographics
• Content that recognizes and addresses visitor concerns directly

In many cases, sites stuck on page two aren't technically flawed – they simply don't resonate with users as strongly as their competitors do. This human connection generates signals that Google increasingly values above traditional ranking factors.

According to a recent study by SearchEngineJournal, user experience metrics now account for approximately 30% of Google's ranking considerations, highlighting the importance of creating content that genuinely engages visitors rather than just satisfying technical requirements.

The E-E-A-T Misunderstanding

Many SEO professionals mistakenly treat Google's E-E-A-T guidelines (Experience, Expertise, Authoritativeness, and Trustworthiness) as a checklist of elements to add to content. Montti highlights a recent correction from Google's John Mueller at the 2025 NYC Search Central Live event:

"Sometimes SEOs come to us or like mention that they've added EEAT to their web pages. That's not how it works. Sorry, you can't sprinkle some experiences on your web pages."

Instead, E-E-A-T represents a standard against which Google evaluates content. It reflects qualities inherent in truly valuable content rather than specific elements that can be artificially inserted.

To demonstrate authentic expertise, websites should focus on creating comprehensive content that addresses user needs from multiple angles. This approach is more effective than simply adding author bios or credentials without substantive expertise in the actual content.

Other Overlooked Ranking Factors

The analysis identifies several additional reasons for ranking drops that site owners frequently miss:

1. Temporary ranking boosts ending: New sites often receive a temporary visibility boost while Google "tastes" them to see how they fit with the rest of the internet. Many SEOs celebrate these initial rankings without recognizing they're temporary by design.

2. Topic personalization: Search results increasingly vary based on user context, with Google dynamically adjusting topical themes based on previous searches, location, device, and time of day.

3. External validation of authoritativeness: While expertise originates within a website, authoritativeness depends on third-party recognition through citations, links, and user signals.

4. Multimodal approach to content: Sites that communicate through multiple channels and formats often outperform those relying primarily on text content.

This multifaceted approach to content creation can significantly help increase website traffic by ensuring your content remains resilient against algorithm updates while also meeting diverse user preferences.

The Impact of Outdated Optimization Techniques

Many sites continue to employ outdated SEO practices that were effective years ago but may now trigger algorithmic filters. These include:

• Excessive keyword density: Modern content should focus on comprehensive topic coverage rather than specific keyword repetition.

• Thin content optimized for specific keywords: Today's algorithms reward depth and breadth of coverage rather than minimal content targeting specific phrases.

• Artificial link building: Links built primarily for SEO purposes rather than as genuine editorial citations can diminish rather than enhance rankings.

Sites experiencing sudden ranking drops should audit their optimization strategies to ensure they align with current best practices rather than outdated techniques.

How You Can Use This Information

Understanding these overlooked factors can help website owners develop more effective strategies for maintaining and recovering rankings:

• Analyze competitor pages for subtle user experience differences rather than just technical SEO elements
• Consider creating separate pages targeting different topical themes when Google personalizes results
• Invest in traditional marketing and outreach to build genuine third-party signals
• Focus on ways your content can emotionally connect with visitors beyond just providing information
• Develop content that demonstrates expertise naturally rather than trying to artificially signal E-E-A-T

The most sustainable approach is building a site that genuinely resonates with visitors, earning attention beyond search, and giving Google consistent evidence that users prefer it over alternatives.

As Montti concludes, "Marketing, the old-fashioned tell-people-about-a-business approach to promoting it, should not be overlooked" – a reminder that sometimes the most effective SEO strategy is building a genuinely better user experience that people naturally want to share and recommend.

Potential Implementation Improvements:

To make this content more actionable for readers, each section could benefit from specific examples and case studies showing how sites have successfully adapted to algorithm changes. Adding a diagnostic framework would also help readers assess which of these factors might be affecting their own sites after a core update. Additionally, incorporating step-by-step recovery strategies for each factor would transform this from primarily informational content into a practical troubleshooting guide.