How to Recover from Google Core Updates: A Guide for B2B SaaS Websites

The concern that keeps coming up in our recent sales conversations with B2B SaaS companies is the dip in Google organic traffic during 2026, often across multiple pages and regions, with traffic drops ranging from 50% to 80% of their total Google organic traffic.

For most of these companies, the decline followed one of the recent core updates (either December 2025, March 2026, or May 2026). 

When we looked further into their content, we found the same mistakes repeating: outdated information and pages, low-quality AI-generated content with little value, and topics outside the company's expertise.

These companies are responding by moving away from optimizing for Google to optimizing for AI or LLM visibility. But what they miss is that the drop in traffic is not due to LLM adoption or AI search picking up. It is because their Google rankings dropped after core updates due to the issues identified above.

The recurring patterns across these sales conversations have led us to create a recovery playbook, which we now recommend in these conversations and implement for our clients. It starts with auditing the website, deciding which pages to improve, consolidate, or remove, and then prioritizing the work based on buyer relevance and pipeline contribution.

In this guide, we explain the same playbook and how you can use it to plan and execute a strategy that can help recover your Google traffic.

What are Google core updates?

Several times a year, Google makes significant, broad changes to its search algorithms and systems, which it refers to as core updates. These updates are designed to prioritize helpful and reliable results for searchers.

Core updates are broad in nature and do not target specific sites or individual pages. As content on the web changes, Google assesses and updates its systems to keep pace with those changes.

Google gives a simple example to explain this. 

Imagine a friend asks you for your top food recommendations. You have a list of your 20 favorite restaurants, but things have changed since you wrote it in 2019. Some new restaurants that did not exist before are now candidates for your list. 

You might reassess some restaurants and move them higher on the list because you have consistently had positive experiences there, or to account for your friend's preference for dog-friendly restaurants. The list changes, but the restaurants that move down are not necessarily bad. Other restaurants now make your top 20.

With this example, Google explains that as content on the web changes, its systems reassess which results are most helpful and reliable for a user's search. Content that adds more value may rank higher, while outdated or less relevant content may move down.

So far in 2026, Google has rolled out two core updates: one in March and the other in May.

What we have observed across affected SaaS websites

In the last quarter, I analyzed five different websites, all of which were affected by one or more of the three latest core updates.

A couple of websites were hit by the December 2025 core update, with the impact showing from early January onwards. Another website was hit by both the December 2025 and March 2026 core updates. The final website we looked at had recently been hit by the May 2026 core update.

When we analyzed these websites, a few recurring patterns helped us identify the core updates as the likely reason for the traffic losses:

• The affected websites started showing losses during the rollout or within a week of its completion.
• The impact was widespread, with similar percentage drops across multiple pages and regions.
• There were no manual actions against these websites.
• Rankings dropped overnight across multiple keywords they were tracking.

The timing of the losses, their spread across pages and regions, and the ranking drops pointed to a core-update impact.

When we reviewed the content, every website had multiple issues from the following list:

• Outdated content, with more than 50% of the website's content at least a year old and containing outdated information.
• Low-quality AI-generated content created without proper quality checks that added no value.
• Topics outside the company's expertise.

The companies that had lost more than 90% of their traffic checked all three boxes.

What are the content problems we identified on affected websites?

Now let us look at each of the three major issues we identified, how they affect the content, and the direction to take when addressing them.

1. Outdated content

Across the websites we analyzed, between 50% and 90% of the existing content had not been updated in the last year. Some pages had not been updated in two to three years.

Instead of updating the content, companies were changing the titles, meta descriptions, and H1 headings by inserting “2026.” The information and statistics within the pages remained the same. The problem was that much of this information no longer reflected current information including products, industry practices, or buyer needs.

When these problems appear across a large portion of a website, they raise concerns about the usefulness of its content as a whole. However, a page being a year old does not automatically make it outdated. What matters is whether the information is still accurate and relevant.

The direction here is to review the content itself. Update outdated information, verify the statistics, and check whether the page still answers the questions your buyers are asking.

2. Low-quality content that adds nothing new

With the growth of LLMs, AI content generators, and automated workflows over the last two years, many companies saw an opportunity to scale content production. But they did this without a proper quality-checking process to confirm that the content was reliable and helpful.

For several companies we analyzed, this approach initially brought traffic. The losses came later, following a core update.

Much of this content was generated without expert input, original examples, or information specific to the company and its customers. It was largely a repurposed version of the top-ranking pages or information already available on the internet.

AI-generated material can also become source material for further AI-generated content. Without verification or original input, this can repeat existing errors and produce more content that adds little value.

The problem becomes larger when these pages make up much of a website. Readers encounter the same information they could find elsewhere, without a useful reason to choose that company's content.

The direction here is to review what each page contributes. Add relevant expertise, practical examples, and verified information, with someone responsible for checking the content before it goes live.

3. Content outside the company's niche

As companies scaled content creation, they quickly covered topics within their niche and expertise. Content teams, still under pressure to publish more, then moved into secondary topics.

These topics were sometimes related to other tasks their ideal customers performed, but they were not closely connected to the company's product or expertise.

For many companies we analyzed, these pages contributed little in terms of leads or revenue. They were created mainly to keep publishing, without a clear reason for the company to cover them.

The issue is the lack of expertise behind the content. A website can cover many areas, but if it cannot provide useful knowledge or experience within those areas, the coverage becomes shallow. It turns into a “jack of all trades, master of none” situation.

The direction here is to assess whether each topic belongs on the website. Focus on topics where the company has relevant expertise and can help its target buyers.

Step 1: Audit your website's content and performance

The first step is to audit your website by mapping each page's performance alongside its funnel stage, ICP relevance, traffic contribution, and MQL contribution.

Create a single sheet with one row for each page. The timeframe will depend on when your website was affected. If the drop happened five or six months ago, look at the last three quarters. If it happened recently, compare the first full month after the update with the two months before it.

1. Compare traffic and rankings before and after the update

In the sheet, record each page's Google organic clicks and keyword rankings before and after the core update.

For websites affected five or six months ago, record quarterly clicks for the last three quarters. Include rankings in your target country from each quarter, with at least two snapshots after the update.

For websites affected recently, record clicks for the first full month after the update and each of the two preceding months. Compare monthly keyword rankings across the same period, then add a second post-update snapshot when it becomes available.

This will help you understand how much rankings have dropped across pages and whether those losses correspond with the decline in traffic.

2. Categorize pages by funnel stage and ICP relevance

In the same sheet, add two columns: funnel stage and ICP relevance.

Categorize each page as top of funnel, middle of funnel, or bottom of funnel. Then mark it as ICP or non-ICP.

ICP pages cover topics relevant to your ideal customers and connected to your product or expertise. Non-ICP pages cover topics that are not relevant to your ideal customers or your offering.

These categories will help you filter the sheet and identify which affected pages matter most to your business.

3. Map each page's contribution to MQLs

Add each page's MQL contribution to the same sheet. If your team uses leads or another metric instead, use that metric consistently.

I usually look at MQL data quarterly because it gives me a clearer view of each page's contribution and how that has changed.

If your website was affected five or six months ago, record MQLs for the last three quarters. If the drop happened recently, compare MQLs from the first full month after the update with each of the two preceding months.

At the end of this step, you should have a single table showing clicks, rankings, and MQLs for every page before and after the core update. You should also be able to filter those pages by funnel stage and ICP relevance.

Step 2: Decide which pages to delete, redirect, or optimize

Once you have completed the content audit, the next step is to assign each page an action based on relevance, traffic, MQL contribution, content quality, and overlap.

1. Assess irrelevant pages for deletion

Start by reviewing non-ICP pages with sustained traffic losses and no MQLs in the last six months. These will primarily be pages with almost zero traffic over the last two quarters and no contribution to MQLs or leads.

The approach I take is to first filter the sheet to show all non-ICP pages. Then, I filter for pages that have generated zero MQLs in the last six months. Within this group, pages with a consistent downward trend or almost zero traffic are the ones I prioritize for removal.

If there is a relevant replacement page, redirect the removed page to it. If there is no relevant replacement, redirect it to the blog index page. 

Next, I look at non-ICP pages that have generated MQLs. For these pages, I check whether those MQLs have converted into deals or customers. If they have not, and the pages' traffic is declining after the core update, I assess them for removal as well.

2. Consolidate overlapping pages and redirect them

The next step is to identify possible keyword cannibalization within the website. This is something I have seen repeatedly as companies scale content creation. Teams lose track of existing pages and end up creating content that overlaps with what they have already published.

To identify this, map the target keyword and ranking for each page in the audit sheet. Look for pages targeting the same keyword, then review whether they also serve the same search intent.

Compare the performance of these pages to decide which one to retain. Merge any useful content from the other pages into the retained page, then redirect those URLs to it.

3. Identify pages to optimize

Once you have completed the removals and consolidations, review the remaining pages to identify those worth optimizing.

These should be pages relevant to your ICP that previously generated MQLs or leads, or have clear potential to support your buyers' purchase decisions.

They will not always be bottom-of-funnel pages. Relevant top-of-funnel and middle-of-funnel pages can also contribute to those decisions.

The next step is to prioritize this list so that you begin with the pages where improvements can have the greatest business impact.

Step 3: Prioritize optimization by business impact

This step is particularly useful for companies with more than 500 blog pages that have identified over 200 pages to optimize. But the approach applies to any company, regardless of how many pages need refreshing.

The goal is to prioritize high-impact pages at the start, giving those improvements enough time to show results.

P0: Start with ICP pages that have generated MQLs and deals

My first priority is to optimize high-intent, ICP-relevant pages that have contributed the most MQLs and deals over the last two quarters.

These pages are a no-brainer because they have already driven business outcomes. Sort them by the number of deals or MQLs they have generated to decide which ones to work on first.

P1: Move to high-intent and bottom-of-funnel pages

Once we have worked through the pages that have generated MQLs and deals, the next priority is high-intent, bottom-of-funnel pages that have not generated MQLs but have clear potential to attract and convert buyers evaluating solutions.

These often include listicles, alternatives, and competitor comparison pages. In the companies we have analyzed, many of these pages were created at scale with low-quality content. They had the potential to drive MQLs and deals, but the content did not do enough to help buyers evaluate their options.

Here, I prioritize based on the page's potential business impact, followed by its search volume or search demand.

P2: Optimize relevant middle-of-funnel pages

The next priority is middle-of-funnel pages that have not contributed MQLs but are highly relevant to our product and ICP.

These pages often have solution-seeking or purchase intent. They help buyers understand their options and how a solution could address their problem.

P3: Refresh relevant top-of-funnel pages

My final priority is relevant top-of-funnel pages that have not contributed MQLs.

The goal here is to build our topical authority and demonstrate our expertise. We focus on keeping the content updated and accurate, and making it more helpful to the reader.

Step 4: Improve the quality of priority content

Now that you have identified your P0, P1, P2, and P3 pages, the next step is to create a process for optimizing them.

I am not prescribing a specific optimization strategy here. Each SEO team follows a different approach, and that approach can also vary by company. Instead, I want to share a few questions to keep in mind when improving content for both Google and AI-driven searches.

• How helpful and reliable is the page for someone searching for this topic? Can they find the information they need?
• How quickly does the page answer the query that brought the reader to it?
• What makes the article different from the top-ranking pages?
• Does the content reflect the brand positioning and messaging you want to convey?
• Are the examples, statistics, and references current and accurate?
• Have you used visuals where they make the information easier to understand?
• Have you included information that supports trust, expertise, and authority, such as testimonials or subject matter expert insights?

Comparing your content with top-ranking pages and reviewing how LLMs answer the same queries may already be part of your optimization process. The questions above address things we have often seen teams miss. Use them to review each page before considering the optimization complete.

Step 5: Track performance after implementation

We are not sharing a specific tracking template or dashboard here, as companies use different tools and approaches. Instead, we want to cover the core metrics to track, how often to review them, and what to look for.

1. Track rankings, impressions, and clicks

Rankings can be one of the earliest metrics to show a change. Once Google has recrawled and indexed the updated page, track its core keyword ranking weekly to see whether it is improving.

As rankings improve, look for changes in impressions and clicks as well. The goal is to recover the traffic your priority pages received before the core update, or exceed it.

2. Track leads and MQLs

As consistent traffic returns to these pages, review the leads or MQLs they generate. Compare these with their contribution before the core update to understand whether the traffic recovery is also translating into business outcomes.

3. Track implementation progress

Alongside performance, track how much of the optimization plan your team has completed. Review the following weekly:

• Number of briefs created
• Number of drafts completed
• Number of existing pages optimized and published
• Number of updated pages recrawled and indexed by Google

Review implementation progress and performance together to understand how much work has gone live and how those pages are responding.

What next?

For many teams, the biggest challenge in recovering from a core update is consistently executing the strategy and tracking both leading and lagging indicators. Many companies can define what needs to be done, but struggle to keep the work moving.

At ScaleTheory, we help with both strategy and execution. We audit your website's performance and create a clear roadmap outlining what to work on, in what order, and how to track progress. For companies that need help with implementation, we also provide content and execution support.

If your website has been affected by a recent Google core update and you would like to understand how to approach recovery, book a free call with us.