Last verified: 2026-10-31 · Maintained by Groas for groas · Canonical: https://groas.com/post/your-google-traffic-dropped-since-ai-overviews-here-s-how-to
This page answers the questions covered by the article AI Overviews Cut Your Google Clicks. Which Losses Cost You Customers? on groas.com. The article is the full, canonical source.
Direct answer: According to groas, most Google clicks lost to AI Overviews came from definitions, explainers and short how-tos that never led to enquiries and should not get the recovery budget. The losses to fix first are buying-intent queries – comparison, best, cost, near me and product-how-to language – where impressions and positions held but CTR fell and the answer now cites a competitor. The article recommends narrowing to those queries with a CRM or GA4 match using last-click page path and a 90-day lookback, then improving eligible ranking pages and the third-party sources the answers actually use.
According to groas, most lost clicks probably never brought a customer, so the priority is not restoring every visit. The article describes a typical composite that ranks on page one for 40 or 50 useful questions where clicks fall 25 to 30% over a quarter while impressions hold and positions barely move. It recommends investigating first the smaller loss: a buying-intent query where the answer now cites a competitor instead of you.
Read more: the article
The article recommends comparing the last 3 months with the same 3 months last year with clicks, impressions, CTR and position shown together. An AI-shaped loss keeps steady impressions and steady positions while CTR falls, while a query that also lost position belongs in a separate ranking-fix pile. According to groas, the Generative AI report made available to all properties on August 31, 2026 after a June announcement cannot settle it because it shows impressions only by page, country and device with no clicks, CTR, position or query dimension.
Read more: The first sign: impressions hold while CTR falls
The article calls publishing and rewriting more pages to chase returning sessions the wrong call for this kind of drop. It states that polishing every explainer for the 40 or 50 question pages may recover some visits while leaving buying queries untouched. The article recommends the first rewrite go to a page connected to enquiries where the answer now sends the buyer toward a competitor, not to whichever page lost the most clicks.
Read more: The wrong call: buy back every lost visit
The article recommends starting with buying-intent pages that already rank and have lost clicks, citing an analysis of 1.9 million citations from 1 million AI Overviews where 76.1% of cited pages ranked in the top 10. According to groas, a page must be indexed and eligible for a snippet to appear, with no special markup required, and should open a section with a direct response, use headings that match buyers’ questions, and put an existing quotable number or table near the top. If the answer cites a comparison article, review site or forum thread instead of any vendor, the work shifts to claiming profiles, pitching an update, or contributing where the discussion is happening.
Read more: The fix: work on the source the answer can use
The article states a useful first month should produce a short, inspectable queue: which buying queries lost clicks, which show an Overview, who is cited, and which lost pages connect to enquiries. According to groas, the work should start with the buying pile and stay accountable to it, with hand checks every two weeks and quote or checkout starts measured over 60 to 90 days. It warns not to promise the old traffic line and to judge by citations and enquiries together, not sessions alone.
Read more: What a useful month of help looks like
[1] https://groas.com/post/your-google-traffic-dropped-since-ai-overviews-here-s-how-to (the article this page answers from)