Last Updated on September 22, 2025
TL;DR (Executive Summary)
- What changed (Sep 19, 2025): Google effectively killed the
&num=100trick that many rank trackers used to fetch deep results. Tools (including Ahrefs) can still refresh often, but depth beyond page 1 is reduced. - What it means: Expect shallower rank data, occasional “missing” deep positions, and historical apples-to-oranges in reports. Your actual rankings didn’t suddenly drop; the measurement method changed.
- Why it matters: You’ll have less visibility into positions 11–100, making it harder to spot rising pages early or benchmark long-tail clusters the old way.
- Where to focus now: Prioritize Top 3/Top 10 coverage, CTR, and GSC impressions over “Top 100” visibility. Blend Search Console with tool data for a truer picture.
- Reporting hygiene: Add a methodology disclaimer to dashboards, mark the pre- and post-change dates on time-series charts, and reset goals to page 1 outcomes and business KPIs.
3 actions for this week
- Reset KPIs: Swap “% in Top 100” → % in Top 3/Top 10 + CTR + impressions (non-brand and by funnel stage).
- Re-scope tracking lists: Trim vanity deep terms; expand intent-led clusters and SERP feature targets (snippets, FAQs, comparisons).
- Build a momentum view: In GSC, monitor the average position + impressions trend to catch pages rising toward page 1 despite shallower third-party depth.
For years, SEOs (and the tools we use) leaned on a simple URL parameter – &num=100 – to pull a “top 100” snapshot of Google’s results for a keyword.
That depth made it easy to track early movers, benchmark long-tail clusters, and show gradual progress in reports.
As of Sep 19, 2025, that shortcut effectively stopped working. Rank trackers can still refresh frequently, but they can’t reliably collect as many results beyond page 1.
Why this matters? Your rank reports can look different overnight even if your actual rankings didn’t change.
Fewer deep positions will be recorded; some keywords that once showed position 37 or 82 may now appear untracked.
If you rely on “% of keywords in Top 100” as a KPI, your charts may fluctuate for measurement reasons, rather than performance.
What Exactly Changed in Google’s SERPs
- The old behavior: Appending
&num=100(or similar) A Google results URL often returned a deeper list (up to 100 results) in one fetch. Rank trackers used this to capture more positions per keyword efficiently. - The new reality: Google’s current behavior prevents that deep one-shot retrieval. Tools can still check results, but the reliably captured depth is shallower, especially beyond page 1.
- What didn’t change:
- Your actual rankings in Google and how users experience page 1.
- The frequency with which many tools refresh data.
- The fundamentals of SEO: relevance, content quality, links, UX, and intent matching still decide who wins the clicks.
Practical effect: You’ll see fewer tracked URLs in positions 11–100; historical “deep” time series won’t line up perfectly with new data. This is a methodology shift, not necessarily a performance drop.
Who Is Affected (Use Cases)
Agencies
- Weekly/monthly reporting across large keyword sets now shows fewer positions beyond page 1.
- “% in Top 100” KPI becomes noisy; apples-to-oranges when comparing pre/post Sep 19, 2025.
- Client questions about “missing keywords” increase; reporting decks need a clear methodology note.
In-House SEO Teams
- It is harder to spot early momentum (e.g., position 34 → 22 → 12) using third-party rank trackers alone.
- Competitive benchmarking at depth (positions 20–100) loses fidelity; need more GSC + page-1 feature tracking.
Content & Editorial Teams
- Page-2/3 intel for expansion opportunities becomes patchier.
- Must rely more on Search Console impressions, internal search data, and qualitative SERP checks to validate topics.
Performance/Analytics Stakeholders
- Historical trend lines that included deep positions may dip or flatten for methodological, not performance, reasons.
- Requires KPI resets and annotations in dashboards to sustain trust.
The SEO Impact: What You’ll Notice Day-to-Day
1) Shallower Rank Coverage
- Fewer tracked entries beyond page 1; some keywords previously recorded at p12–p50 may no longer appear.
- Rank “volatility” may be an artifact of collection depth, not genuine moves.
2) Reporting Friction
- Legacy KPIs (Top 100 coverage, average rank across 1–100) degrade in usefulness.
- Need annotations marking Sep 19, 2025, as the methodology change in all time-series charts.
3) Trend Blind Spots
- Early risers are harder to see with third-party tools alone.
- Mitigation: monitor GSC impressions + average position and set alerts for statistically significant shifts.
4) Benchmarking & Competitive Analysis
- Competitive gap analyses that relied on deep SERP scrapes undercount visibility past page 1.
- Shift toward page-1 footprint comparisons, SERP feature share, and link equity analysis.
5) Workflow Adjustments
- Smaller, curated keyword lists for manual checks (especially for strategic head terms).
- More emphasis on intent-led clusters and conversion-adjacent queries vs. vanity long lists.
6) Communication & Expectation Setting
- Stakeholders might misread missing deep positions as “rank drops.”
- Add a persistent dashboard disclaimer and reframe goals to Top 3/Top 10 share, CTR, impressions, and conversions.
What Did Not Change (Avoid False Alarms)?
- Google’s ranking algorithms: Your pages didn’t suddenly “lose” positions because of this news. What changed is how deeply third-party tools can observe results—not the results themselves.
- User behavior on page 1: The lion’s share of clicks still comes from the Top 3 / Top 10. That’s where outcomes are won.
- Core SEO levers: Relevance, E-E-A-T signals, content quality and freshness, internal linking, technical health, and authoritative backlinks still drive visibility.
- First-party truth sources: Google Search Console (queries, impressions, clicks, CTR, average position) remains your best ground truth for demand and momentum—especially when third-party depth is shallow.
- The value of structured content: Schema, snippet-friendly formatting, and intent-aligned headings still improve eligibility for page-1 features.
FAQs
Not necessarily. The big shift is in measurement depth. With &num=100 gone and Google capping to 10 results per request, impressions from deeper positions aren’t counted the same way, which can look like a drop.
Yes, any tool that relies on fetching 100 results in one go is impacted, including Ahrefs; they’ve stated that update frequency remains, but depth beyond page 1 is reduced.
Because impressions from pages 2–10 aren’t being tallied like before in many scenarios. Less deep exposure → fewer impressions; if your remaining impressions skew toward higher positions, the average position can appear to improve.
There’s no official replacement. Community chatter notes that pagination is now required (and costlier); no reliable, policy-friendly workaround has emerged.
Outcomes that matter: Top 3/Top 10 share, CTR, impressions, and conversions—plus eligibility for page-1 features. Use third-party tools for page-1 visibility and competitor context, and GSC for demand and momentum. Ahrefs’ own update highlights the shift toward page-1 depth.
Conclusion
Google removing 100-result pages is a measurement shock, not an automatic performance crisis.
Treat mid-September 2025 as a hard line in your reporting, re-center strategy on page-1 outcomes, and rebuild discovery around intent and first-party momentum signals.
With expectations reset and dashboards annotated, you’ll still see what matters and you’ll spend more time moving pages into the positions that actually drive clicks.
