Jump to

Skill · SEO keyword gap audit

SEO keyword gap audit.

The keywords competitors rank for that you do not, scored by opportunity.

Compare a property's organic footprint against a competitor set and find the keywords they rank for that the target does not. A gap matrix sorts every keyword by who ranks where, the audit focuses on the pure-gap cell, and a weighted opportunity score turns the list into a prioritized plan.

It runs on Ahrefs MCP data. The discipline is filtering: not every gap keyword is worth pursuing, and a small keyword you can rank for beats a large one you cannot.

Audience: SEO and content teams planning content investment, hunting quick-win keywords, scoping a market entry, or diagnosing why a competitor is gaining organic share.

View the skill on GitHubBrowse the full catalog

The framework

Four cells, one primary focus.

Each keyword falls into one cell based on whether the target ranks and whether competitors do. The audit focuses on the pure gap.

  1. 01Pure gap (top focus): competitors rank in the top 10 and the target does not rank, or ranks past page 3. These are the primary opportunities.
  2. 02Shared territory: both the target and competitors rank. Useful for defending position and finding pages to push from page 2 to page 1.
  3. 03Unique territory: the target ranks and no competitor does. A differentiator to protect, once confirmed it is actually valuable rather than just irrelevant.
  4. 04Untouched: no one in the set ranks. Could be an opportunity or a dead end, so validate the intent before investing.

Scoring the gaps

Five weighted dimensions per keyword.

Not every gap keyword is worth pursuing. Each candidate is scored on five dimensions, normalized to a 0-to-100 opportunity score. Weights shift toward position potential for quick wins, toward relevance and volume for strategic territory.

  1. 01

    Business relevance (30%)

    How close the keyword sits to a money topic for the target. The heaviest weight, because a vanity gap with no buyer intent is not worth the work.

  2. 02

    Search volume (20%)

    Estimated monthly searches in the target market. Real demand, but not the deciding factor on its own.

  3. 03

    Intent match (20%)

    Whether the target can satisfy the dominant SERP intent. A gap SERP dominated by tools or marketplaces is not addressable by an article.

  4. 04

    Difficulty (15%)

    How hard the keyword is to rank for, from Ahrefs KD or a proxy, read against the actual SERP rather than the score alone.

  5. 05

    Position potential (15%)

    A realistic shot at the top 3 within six months. What separates a quick win from a long campaign.

Runs on this platform

The audit's data backend.

The audit runs on the Ahrefs MCP. The competitor organic keywords, the keyword footprints, the traffic estimates, and the difficulty scores all come from the Ahrefs integration.

Reference files

The reference that goes alongside the SKILL.md.

  • references/opportunity-scoring-rubric.md

    The scoring rubric with normalization rules, the formula, and worked examples.

Browse all reference files on GitHub

Bridges to other skills

What it sits between.

This audit works at the keyword level against a competitor set. These cover the discovery before it, the content twin beside it, and what its output feeds.

  • Discovery first

    seo-keyword

    Pure keyword discovery without a competitor frame is research. This audit adds the competitor comparison that turns a keyword list into a gap list.

  • The content twin

    seo-content-gap-audit

    Works in topics and decay where this works in individual keywords. The two audits feed each other and are best run adjacent.

  • The wider frame

    seo-competitor

    The SERP-overlap angle of a full competitor analysis becomes this worked, scored keyword list. Start there for the field, here for the keyword opportunities.

  • What it feeds

    content-strategy

    Topic and pillar planning takes this audit's prioritized list and builds the program around it. The audit names the targets; strategy sequences the work.

  • Page execution

    seo-onpage

    Some gap keywords are addressable by updating an existing page. When the action is update, optimizing that page is on-page work.

Open source under MIT

Read the SKILL.md on GitHub.

The skill source lives in the rampstackco/claude-skills repository alongside dozens of other skills covering the full lifecycle of brand and product work. This page is a structured overview; the SKILL.md is the source. MIT licensed.

View SKILL.mdBrowse the full catalog

Frequently asked questions.

What is the gap matrix?
A two-by-two on whether the target ranks and whether competitors rank. Pure gap (competitors rank, the target does not) is the primary opportunity. Shared territory (both rank) is for defending position and pushing pages from page 2 to page 1. Unique territory (the target ranks, no competitor does) is a differentiator to protect, once confirmed valuable. Untouched (no one ranks) could be an opportunity or a dead end, so validate intent before investing. The audit focuses on the pure-gap cell and treats the others as secondary.
How is each gap keyword scored?
On five weighted dimensions, each normalized to 0 to 100: business relevance (30 percent), search volume (20 percent), intent match (20 percent), difficulty (15 percent), and position potential (15 percent). The weights adjust to the goal: weight position potential and difficulty higher for quick wins, and business relevance and volume higher for strategic territory. Bands set the action: 80 to 100 is top priority for this quarter, 60 to 79 within six months, 40 to 59 a watch list, and below 40 is parked.
Is a high-volume gap keyword always worth pursuing?
No, and volume worship is a failure mode. A 50-volume keyword you can realistically rank for beats a 5,000-volume one you cannot. Filter every gap for business relevance, because a high-volume gap with zero buyer intent is a vanity opportunity, and match content type to intent, because a gap whose SERP is dominated by tools or marketplaces is not addressable by an article however well-written. The point is realistic, relevant opportunity, not the biggest number.
Should I trust the Ahrefs difficulty score?
Treat it as a heuristic, not a verdict. Difficulty scores are useful for narrowing a long list, but they are estimates, so look at the actual SERP before committing. A difficulty score can be misleadingly low when the SERP is dominated by the likes of Forbes and Wikipedia, which a raw number does not capture. The score narrows the candidates; the SERP confirms whether the target can realistically reach the top three.
How is this different from keyword research?
Keyword research discovers queries without a competitor frame; this audit compares the target's organic footprint against a named competitor set to find the keywords they rank for and the target does not. Pick the competitor set by SERP overlap rather than brand recognition, because competitors chosen by reputation produce gap lists that are not actually competitive. Run it adjacent to the content-gap audit, and re-run it on a cadence, since a gap closes and reopens as competitors keep publishing.