.d53b12e5.png&w=3840&q=75 "Trivas.ai")
by Trivas.aiThis is an internal audit note, written up because we're about to make a call on a page that's quietly doing nothing: /resources/blog-insights/roas-benchmarks-whats-considered-good-performa. Three months of data, under 10 impressions, zero clicks. That's not a slow page. That's a page nobody is finding.
Here's the plan for what happens to it, and why "rewrite it and hope" isn't on the table.
Start with the number that matters: fewer than 10 impressions and zero clicks over a 90-day window. That's not a ranking problem you fix with better headers or a fresher intro paragraph. That's a page Google barely bothers to show, for a query space that apparently isn't searching for it in this form.
A lot of teams default to "let's optimize it and see." Wrong move here. This isn't a borderline page with decent impressions and a weak click-through rate, the kind of thing a title tag rewrite might actually save. This is thin content sitting on a topic that overlaps hard with something else on the site. Overlapping, under-performing pages don't just sit there harmlessly. They split relevance signals and give Google two weak pages to choose from instead of one strong one.
The real issue: this page competes directly with the ROAS calculator, which already has an interactive tool, a clearer intent match, and (presumably) more authority behind it. Two pages fighting over "what's a good ROAS" is worse than one page owning it outright.
So the decision is simple. Merge the usable parts into a stronger page, 301 the URL, and stop trying to rescue this one in place.
Before anything gets redirected, somebody needs to go through the existing page line by line and decide what's actually worth saving.
Look for specific benchmark numbers first. If there are real ROAS ranges broken out by industry, ecommerce vs. DTC vs. marketplace sellers, that's the valuable core of the page. Formulas and worked examples count too, assuming they're not already covered elsewhere.
Everything else is probably filler. "What is ROAS" definitions, generic boilerplate about why return on ad spend matters, intro paragraphs that exist just to pad word count: cut it. Don't migrate it, don't try to "improve" it. Dead weight doesn't become useful just because it moves to a new URL.
One important check before merging anything: compare this page's content against the existing copy on /tools/roas-calculator. If the calculator page already explains ROAS mechanics and formulas, don't duplicate that material in the merged version. The goal is one clean explanation, not two versions of the same paragraph living on different pages.
Last step in the audit: pull any backlinks, internal or external, pointing at this URL. Internal links are easy to find and fix. External ones matter more, because once the redirect goes live, those links need somewhere sensible to land, not a 404 dressed up as a redirect.
The obvious home for this content is the ROAS calculator. It already owns the search intent around ROAS, people land there wanting a number, and benchmark data gives that number context. "Is my ROAS good?" is a natural follow-up question right next to a calculator that just told someone their ROAS. Pairing the two makes the page stronger, not just longer.
The one risk: if the calculator's layout is built around a tool widget and short supporting copy, it might not have room for long benchmark tables broken out by industry. If that's the case, the fallback is the guides and reports hub, where a fuller ROAS guide can carry the benchmark detail without cramming it awkwardly next to a calculator input field.
Either way, the decision comes down to authority. A page with existing traffic and trust beats a brand new standalone post every time, especially when the standalone version already proved it couldn't attract search demand on its own. Building a second thin page to replace the first thin page solves nothing.
Whichever target gets picked, it needs to carry the "what's a good ROAS" framing and the actual benchmark figures. That's the one piece of search intent worth preserving from the original page. Lose that, and the merge is just a redirect to nowhere relevant.
Once the content's been migrated into the pillar page, set a 301 redirect from the old URL straight to it. Not a 302, not a meta refresh. A permanent redirect tells Google (and anyone with the old link saved) that this move is final.
After that, clean up the loose ends:
One contingency worth planning for now: if no merge target ends up being a clean fit (content doesn't translate well, or the pillar page's scope doesn't actually match), don't force a redirect to a page that's only loosely related. A 301 to an unrelated page confuses users and can muddy relevance signals almost as much as the original duplicate content did. In that scenario, noindex,follow is the safer fallback. It keeps the page out of search results without pretending it's the same thing as another page.
The merge isn't done once the redirect goes live. Give it four to six weeks, then check whether the pillar page's impressions and rankings for ROAS benchmark queries actually moved. If the consolidation worked, that page should start showing up for searches the old page never touched.
In Search Console, confirm the old URL has dropped out of the index and that the redirect is being followed properly, not flagged as a soft 404. That distinction matters: a soft 404 means Google isn't trusting the redirect, which usually means the destination page doesn't look different enough from what got removed.
This case is also a good excuse to build a habit, not just fix one page. Re-run a sitewide low-impression, zero-click audit every quarter. Pages drift toward irrelevance quietly. Catching them early, before they've been sitting untouched for a year, makes pruning decisions like this one faster and less painful.
Worth keeping a simple before/after record too: impressions, clicks, and indexing status for this URL pre- and post-merge. Not for a report nobody reads, just as a reference point the next time a similar page comes up for review and someone asks "did this actually work last time."
If you're tracking ROAS and want the benchmark context without digging through a merged page history, the ROAS calculator is the place to start, and it's worth subscribing to blog insights if you want these kinds of audits and benchmark updates as they happen.
explore more insights
3 min read
3 min read
3 min read