AI Overviews & CTR in 2026 — What the Data Actually Says

Part of our AI SEO guide. For pipeline mechanics, see how Google Search works in 2026.

Every AI Overview hot take blends Seer, Ahrefs, and SparkToro into one scary number. That's how you get uncited claims like "86% of queries have AI Overviews" floating around LinkedIn. This post keeps studies separate, states what each one actually measured, and tells you what to track in Search Console instead of panicking about rank alone.

We are not claiming AI Overviews killed SEO. We are claiming the click math changed — and the response is measurement and snippet quality, not GEO hacks.

Seer Interactive: cohort CTR, not month-by-month correlation

Seer's September 2025 update analyzed 3,119 informational queries across 42 organizations and 25.1 million organic impressions (June 2024 through September 2025). Their methodology groups queries by whether an AI Overview appeared in September 2025 — a retrospective cohort, not a live A/B test per query per month.

Headline findings from that study:

Organic CTR on queries with AIO: 1.76% → 0.61% (−61%)
Paid CTR on the same AIO queries: 19.7% → 6.34% (−68%)
Organic CTR on queries without AIO: 2.72% → 1.62% (−41%) — non-AIO queries are not a safe harbor
Brands cited inside AIO vs not cited: +35% organic clicks, +91% paid clicks on the same query set

The citation finding is correlation. Stronger brands may earn both citations and clicks for reasons unrelated to the AIO box itself. Seer says this explicitly — we repeat it because ignoring it leads to bad strategy ("optimize for AIO citation" as a vanity metric with no baseline).

Seer Interactive — September 2025 update

Ahrefs: position-level CTR erosion with AIO present

Ahrefs' December 2025 update uses 300,000 keywords — 150,000 with AI Overviews and 150,000 without — and aggregated Google Search Console desktop CTR data. Their method compares forecasted CTR (what those keywords would likely earn without AIO, based on historical position curves) to actual CTR with AIO present.

In plain English: they estimate the click loss attributable to AIO layout, not just "CTR went down because you rank worse."

Position #1 CTR when AIO present: −58% (was −34.5% in their April 2025 study — the gap widened)
Position #1 CTR, informational keywords: 0.076 → 0.039 (Dec 2023 → Dec 2025)
Position #1 CTR, AIO keywords only: 0.073 → 0.016
Impact by position with AIO: Pos 1 −58%, Pos 2 −50.8%, … Pos 10 −19.4%

Caveat: desktop CTR only, aggregated across many properties. Your single-site numbers will differ — especially on branded vs non-branded splits.

Ahrefs — AI Overviews reduce clicks by 58%

SparkToro: the broader zero-click trend

AI Overviews accelerated a trend that predates them. SparkToro's 2024 zero-click study found a majority of Google searches end without a click to an external site — answers in SERP features, knowledge panels, and now synthesized AI answers all compete for attention before position one gets a chance.

That does not mean organic is dead. It means impression share ≠ traffic share anymore. A page can gain impressions while losing clicks — GSC will show both lines diverging.

SparkToro — 2024 zero-click search study

Two different games: cited in AIO vs ranked #1

Classic SEO optimized for the blue-link #1 slot. AIO introduces a second visibility surface above the fold — sometimes with citations, sometimes without any link to your domain at all.

Seer's +35% organic click correlation for cited brands suggests citation and ranking still overlap but are not identical. You can rank #3 and get cited. You can rank #1 and get skipped. Track both:

GSC Performance: impressions, clicks, CTR, average position per query
Manual AIO audit: for your top 50 informational queries, log whether AIO shows, whether you are cited, and which URLs are cited instead
Branded search lift: AIO exposure may increase brand recall even when organic CTR falls — check branded query volume in GSC separately

Tool trackers (Semrush AI Visibility, etc.) automate the manual audit — we cover which are worth paying for in AI SEO tools 2026.

Why non-AIO queries fell too (−41%)

If AIO were the only driver, queries without AI Overviews would hold steady. Seer shows they did not — organic CTR on non-AIO queries fell 41% over the same period. Likely contributors:

SERP layout changes elsewhere (more features, taller results)
User behavior shift toward asking AI tools directly
Query mix changes as Google surfaces more informational surfaces

Do not build strategy on "we only target keywords without AIO." That pool is shrinking and CTR is falling anyway.

What to measure in GSC now

Google's generative AI reporting in Search Console is still rolling out by property. Until your account has full coverage:

Export top queries by impressions (last 28 days vs prior 28 days)
Flag queries where impressions rose but clicks flatlined — classic AIO/layout symptom
Segment informational vs transactional; AIO impact concentrates on informational
Revisit title tags and meta descriptions on high-impression losers — see title tag guide and meta descriptions & GSC CTR

Broader industry benchmarks live in SEO statistics 2026.

Content structure for the clicks you still get

Lower CTR makes each remaining click more valuable. Pages that survive need:

Clear answer paragraphs under descriptive H2s (passage ranking + AIO extraction)
Accurate FAQ schema matching visible FAQ content — not invisible keyword dumps
First-hand specifics competitors cannot generate from thin air

See schema markup guide for implementation. Google's AI optimization guide says the same thing as classic SEO quality guidance — no special markup required.

What we are not claiming

No blended "average CTR drop" across studies — methodologies differ
No proof that AIO citation causes +35% clicks — correlation only
No universal AIO prevalence percentage — varies wildly by vertical and query type
No recommendation for llms.txt, chunking hacks, or fan-out query page farms

Sources

Try our free SEO tools or explore more in-depth guides.