- Link volume is not a meaningful measure of success.
Counting the number of links a campaign earns might look impressive, but it tells you very little about SEO impact. What matters is whether those links are relevant and authoritative enough to influence rankings. - Cost-per-link is a flawed and damaging KPI.
Measuring digital PR by cost-per-link encourages the wrong behaviours. It shifts the focus to cheap, low-value coverage that looks good on a spreadsheet but does nothing to drive real growth. - DA and DR are not reliable indicators on their own.
Metrics like Domain Authority and Domain Rating are often misused. They do not reflect relevance, brand impact, or the value of nofollow links. High scores mean little if the link doesn’t support your SEO goals. - Real success is measured through rankings, traffic and conversions.
To prove digital PR is working, track its influence on keyword rankings, organic and referral traffic, branded search interest, and leads or revenue from targeted pages. These are the metrics that reflect genuine business impact.
Most digital PR is measured wrong.
I mean, for starters the industry has somehow adopted the term KPI to mean link guarantee when talking about digital PR (KPI means ‘key performance indicator’), but more on that later.
The point I’m trying to make is that for too long, the success of digital PR has been measured with the wrong metrics. And everyone in the industry (agencies, freelancers and in-house marketers alike) has played their role in this.
Let’s not dwell on how things have been done, though. And instead, let’s define how digital PR should be measured, and which metrics aren’t as important as some people might have you believe.
I totally get why many of these metrics have been used to measure digital PR. That’s not what this is about. Rather, it’s about encouraging change in the way we all, as an industry, measure the channel’s success and impact.
Just to be clear; there’s a difference between what’s expected to be delivered (and agreed as a baseline, let’s say) in a contract or a target that’s set and how to measure success. What I’m talking about here is actually measuring whether what’s being done is woring.
Digital PR has been being measured wrong.
Digital PR has been built around the wrong metrics.
Not because they were the best indicators of success, but because they were the easiest to track, report on, and dare I say it, buy and sell on. Over time, these metrics became the benchmarks digital PR is judged on, even when they have very little alignment with broader business measures of success.
What metrics am I talking about?
The number of links
Link count has been the industry’s default measure of success for a number of years. And that’s not because more links correlates with rankings or revenue, but because it was measurable.
Stakeholders got trained to expect targets. And that more links = more success.
PRs built processes around hitting higher link numbers. And campaigns were designed to maximise volume, not impact.
But here’s the problem: Google doesn’t reward you for the number of links you earn; it rewards relevance and authority. This is why you’ll often see sites with a lower DR outranking you for key terms… they might have a smaller link profile but those links are more relevant and authoritative.
Cost-per-link
Cost-per-link (or even worse, cost-per-followed-link) is, no questions asked, the absolute worst metric you can use to measure the impact or success of digital PR.
This metric commoditises digital PR.
And it reduces creative, strategic work to a unit cost; whilst ignoring the fact that not all links are equal, and that many (at least irrelevant ones) aren’t helping you rank, AT ALL..
The pressure to hit a low cost-per-link often leads to irrelevant stories and coverage, and tactics that might look good on a reporting dashboard… but do nothing to contribute to growth.
This mindset tries to equate digital PR to link buying. But this discounts the other things that the tactic drives beyond links… referral traffic, brand awareness, brand searches and even conversions that come off the back of these!
Measuring digital PR by cost-per-link encourages a focus on the wrong things; rather than earning links and coverage that actually have an impact on real business metrics, it rewards volume, even if there’s no actual impact.
Hmm yeah, no thanks.
We should be measuring outcomes, not outputs.
DA & DR
There’s nothing wrong with using DA or DR to understand a site’s relative authority, but they’ve been misused. They’ve been taken as the holy grail of link quality.
These were never Google’s metrics, even though they rose to popularity once Google removed toolbar PageRank.
They were meant to be directional, not definitive.
The problem with using DA or DR as a measure of success is threefold:
- These don’t consider relevance, at all. You can earn high DA or DR links, but if they’re totally irrelevant, they’re likely being ignored or at least dampened by Google.
- These metrics don’t count nofollow links. And in 2025, that’s not representative of how search works. More on this below.
- It’s not all about links. We talk about DA and DR in isolation of links, but there’s more to digital PR (and even it’s impact on SEO success) than this. DA and DR don’t take these into account.
The DA or DR of a site doesn’t necessarily mean it’s going to have an impact on real business metrics. It’s a quick relative measure, but it’s not the way you should be measuring success.
Follow vs nofollow
SEOs have, for too long, considered nofollow links to be worthless.
I’ve lost count of the number of briefs we’ve received over the last few years which come with a note of “we only count followed links.”
It’s 2025 and search just doesn’t work like this anymore. It’s an outdated mindset that nofollow links have no value. Or, a convenient one to try and get more from an agency’s link guarantee. Hmm.
Google started treating nofollow as a hint, rather than a directive, back in 2019. With the right signals in place, Google can, and does, follow nofollow links.
These signals are likely relating to traffic to the page and/or site that’s linking out.
A nofollow link from The Telegraph, for example, that reinforces your brand’s credibility in your vertical is far more valuable than a followed link within a random blog post.
It makes no sense to ignore nofollow links in evaluating digital PR success, for the simple reasons that Google often doesn’t and that these links still drive referral traffic, build brand awareness and can lead to sales and conversions.
Yes, it makes conversations easier when links are all followed, but to say these links are worthless is naive.
Made up ‘link scores’
We’ve also a rise in the last few years of brands, agencies and platforms assigning their own made-up “link scores” to try and help measure the value of links (and, therefore, digital PR); arbitrary numbers that supposedly indicate how valuable a link is. It’s sold as a proprietary metric. A unique way to prove value. But let’s be honest: it’s just another layer of noise.
These scores are usually based on a mix of DA, traffic, link type, and maybe a few other ingredients; all bundled into a shiny number that looks good on a report but tells you nothing about actual SEO impact.
On one hand, I get it … it sounds good and, brand-side, it gives at least something to try and measure agencies on.
But in reality, it just makes no sense.
Made-up metrics like these are often designed to keep clients or stakeholders happy rather than show real progress. They shift focus away from the only thing that matters. And that’s answering the question “Is this activity helping us to make more money as a business?”
The metrics to use to measure digital PR success.
If we want digital PR to be taken seriously as a growth-driving channel, not just a link building tactic, we need to start measuring it in a better way.
That means shifting away from vanity metrics, and focusing on real business impact (and the things that indicate the progress towards that).
Here’s what that should look like:
The impact on rankings
Rankings are an early traction metric; one of the first signs that your efforts are influencing visibility.
But you need to get granular and look at the rankings you’re most likely to have influenced.
Track rankings for the specific keyword groups and pages that align with your commercial SEO goals (which your digital PR efforts should be aligned with).
If you’re building links or authority signals around a particular topic or set of keywords, that topic’s priority pages and query set should be where you’re seeing traction.
Just for clarity; rankings are not everything. But let’s not forget that the right rankings are what drives traffic. If you’re not ranking, you’re not getting traffic from a query. They’re a great early indicator.
I’d recommend tracking keyword groups (broken down by position groups – Position 1, Top 3, Top 10 etc) on a weekly basis to show progress.
The impact on organic traffic
It’s easy to get caught looking at sitewide organic traffic and miss growth that’s actually happening in the areas you’ve targeted.
There are lots of reasons sitewide traffic can be down, especially right now. It just shows trends.
Instead, isolate growth at the page or topic level.
In GA4 (or whatever analytics tool you use), calculate traffic growth (ideally over a 3 – 6 month rolling period) for the page group(s) you’ve targeted – either with links earned directly into this, indirect link authority passed via internal links, or mentions in coverage about the topic – and compare this growth to the sitewide average over that period.
If a page (or cluster) you’ve supported with PR activity is growing faster than the rest of the site, that’s your signal that the channel is having an impact.
Like this:
| Page / Page Group | Growth (#) | Growth (%) |
|---|---|---|
| Sitewide | +2,320 | +6% |
| [Page Group] | +1,893 | +27% |
Start tracking impact on the pages and page groups that are going to make you money and that form part of your strategy and show what’s happening there in relation to the rest of the site.
Referral traffic
We’ve all undervalued this.
Referral traffic isn’t just a side benefit; it’s proof that the story resonated with the readers. It shows people are actually clicking through from the coverage because they wanted to either learn more or visit what’s on the other end of the link.
In some cases, these visitors convert.
In others, they search for the brand later or return via another channel (you really should be retargeting to people who clicked through from PR coverage…)
Either way, referral traffic is a gateway to commercial impact; especially for syndicated coverage where the SEO benefits of the links are a topics that’s often debated.
If you’re driving referral traffic from PR coverage, that’s always a good sign…
The impact on revenue and/or leads
Digital PR’s job isn’t just to build links; it’s to drive an impact on actual business metrics.
By this, I mean money in the bank, or as close to it as you can get. Sometimes, the best we can do as marketers is drive qualified leads (it’s then over to a sales team to convert these).
You need to track, as accurately as you can, the impact on revenue and/or leads as a result of digital PR activity. It’s the closest you’ll come to calculating an ROI (which, let’s just say, is very difficult for a channel that’s about brand building at its core).
Track conversion performance on the specific pages supported by your campaigns. Even if you’re not linking directly to commercial pages, use internal linking and then isolate revenue or lead growth to show contribution.
It’s what I proposed for tracking the impact on traffic, just using conversions and/or revenue as the metrics instead of sessions.
| Page / Page Group | Growth (£) | Growth (%) |
|---|---|---|
| Sitewide | +£36,233 | +8% |
| [Page Group] | +£10,241 | +21% |
The impact on brand searches
Branded search volume is a powerful signal. It tells you people are hearing about the brand, and choosing to search for it.
Google’s leaning harder on brand queries as a trust signal in rankings, and mentions (even without links) drive this, too. After all, if there’s no link and someone wants to find out more about you, the natural thing is to go and run a brand search.
Watch how this trends over time, and tie it to media visibility.
The best way to track brand search activity? Using Google Search Console’s impressions on a filtered view that’s based on queries that include your brand name.
LLM & AI-Powered Search Visibility
I’ve already written extensively about the role of digital PR in being recommended by AI-powered search, and this is something that’s going to need to be tracked and reported on.
Digital PR is going to play a key role in being visible in these new platforms, with third-party mentions being one of the highest correlating factors with being visible.
It’s all about the fact that, if you want to be recommended as the best, you need other people to be saying that. And this means reviews, on UGC platforms like Reddit and in the press.
There are a few different ways to measure LLM and AI-powered search visibility right now:
- By referral traffic from these platforms in GA4 (but don’t forget that a lot of these end up being zero click).
- Using third-party visibility tracking tools. Platforms familiar to SEOs like Semrush and Ahrefs have modules for this, and there’s new tools that have emerged such as Waikay, Profound and Peec AI.
Then there’s the ‘reputation management’ side of tracking AI visibility.
These platforms use third-party mentions, to some degree, to build a picture of how to talk about you. There’s going to be a lot that falls on PRs to control the brand narrative to make sure the way the brand is represented in AI search is accurate.
Ask platforms like ChatGPT (on temporary chat so it’s not using your account’s memory) things like “What is [brand]?” or variations. Ask various branded queries and take note how you’re talked about.
Digital PR needs to be measured on outcomes, not output.
Digital PR has the power to drive real, measurable growth, but it’s been tracked wrong for too long.
Too many are still stuck measuring what’s easy instead of what matters.
Link volume, DA scores, cost-per-link… these don’t paint a picture of the outcomes as a result of the activity, just the output.
If you want to show the impact of digital PR ; to your board, your CMO, or even yourself, you need to start asking tougher questions:
👉 Is this work helping us rank where it matters?
👉 Is it influencing traffic, leads, and revenue?
👉 Is it increasing awareness of our brand with our potential customers?
👉 Is it earning us a place in the conversations and results that shape visibility; in the press, on Google and across AI-driven platforms?
Digital PR isn’t about chasing pointless KPIs.
It’s about earning visibility, relevance, and authority and actually driving an impact.
Outcomes over output. That’s how you win.