Several 2026 studies agree on the direction: when an AI Overview appears, the top organic result gets far fewer clicks. Advanced Web Ranking's July 2026 study put position 1 at 9.69% with an overview versus a 20.02% average overall; Sistrix reported a fall from 27% to 11% in Germany. The size varies by study and query type, so use these as ranges and measure your own pages.
Key Takeaways
- Advanced Web Ranking (US desktop, July 2026) reported position 1 at 20.02% on average and 9.69% with an AI Overview, a 52% decline.
- Sistrix/AISOS (Germany, February-March 2026), as summarised by Slate, reported position 1 falling from 27% to 11%.
- Pew Research's panel, as summarised by Slate, found users clicked traditional results 8% of the time with an AI summary versus 15% without.
- Desktop and mobile diverged in AWR's data, so benchmark by device.
- Stacked features hurt more than any single one.
- The right response is measurement plus better titles, not panic.
The claim
"Ranking first no longer pays." It is half true. Rank still determines who gets the clicks that remain, but the pool of clicks shrank for queries that trigger an overview. Every source below is a third party measuring different SERPs with different methods. None of them is Google's data on your site.
The numbers, side by side
| Source | Sample and date | Finding |
|---|---|---|
| Advanced Web Ranking | US SERPs, desktop, July 2026 | Position 1: 20.02% overall; 9.69% with AI Overview (-52%) |
| Sistrix/AISOS (via Slate) | Germany, Feb-Mar 2026 | Position 1: 27% down to 11% with overview |
| Ahrefs (via Slate) | 2025 | Position 1 CTR down about 58% with overview |
| Seer Interactive (via Slate) | Reported for AI Overview queries | Organic CTR 1.76% to 0.61%, partial recovery by April 2026 |
| Pew Research panel (via Slate) | User panel | 8% clicked a traditional result with a summary vs 15% without |
Some are secondary summaries; I have not traced each to the primary report, so I attribute them as reported. AWR's page was fetched directly on 30 September 2026.
What AWR found beyond the headline
AWR analysed 1.75M+ US SERPs a month, with position 1 baselines from 184.8 million impressions, per its methodology notes. Other findings I found useful:
- AI Overviews appeared on 43% of sampled desktop SERPs.
- Zero-click searches were 74.3% on overview SERPs versus 53.6% without.
- Position 2 lost 64% and position 3 lost 56% with an overview.
- Feature stacking compounds: overview plus People Also Ask plus videos, -81%; local pack plus overview, -97%.
- Desktop position 1 CTR fell from 45.6% in February to 14.6% in May, while mobile rose from about 30% to 39%.
The device split is the surprising part. It means one blended benchmark can mislead you. Pull mobile and desktop separately in Search Console.
Why the numbers disagree
- Different samples. Country, device, language and query mix all differ.
- Different baselines. "Average position 1" mixes navigational queries, which get high CTR, with informational ones.
- Different definitions. Some studies count clicks on any result; others count organic listings only.
- Timing. Overview coverage changed through 2025 and 2026; older figures describe a different SERP.
So a rule like "expect a 58% drop" is unsafe. A range of roughly half to three-fifths is what these sources point to for queries with overviews, and no more should be claimed.
The upside: citation
Slate's summary reports that sites cited inside overviews saw roughly 35% higher CTR than uncited results on the same SERPs, and 340% more impressions. Treat it as an unverified secondary figure. The direction is plausible: being named in the answer earns attention that an uncited page does not.
What to do: a five-step CTR audit
- Export queries. Search Console, last 90 days, filter by device.
- Bucket by intent. Branded, navigational, informational, transactional. Overviews mostly hit informational.
- Flag drops. Compare CTR at the same average position against the prior period. A stable rank with falling CTR points to SERP changes, not a ranking loss.
- Check the SERP. For the top losers, look at what now sits above you.
- Choose a response. Retitle, add a unique data point, target citation, or accept the loss on low-value queries.
That is the same distinction I use to separate a spam or core update from a layout change: rank steady, clicks down means the page above you changed.
Title and snippet work that still helps
- Put the specific reason to click in the title: a number, a scope, a date.
- Avoid titles that let the overview answer the whole question. If the query is a plain fact, the answer is the fact.
- Offer what an overview cannot: a template, tool, dataset or first-hand example.
- Use the meta description to promise the payoff, since Google may rewrite it anyway. See my meta description workflow.
Reporting this to a client or boss
Do not report "traffic fell". Report three things: impressions, average position, and CTR by device, side by side with a note on which queries show overviews. When I worked on organic growth for Masai School, the useful habit was tying reporting to outcomes such as enquiries, since clicks alone can mislead when the SERP changes.
A worked example
Say a page ranks at an average position of 2 for an informational query. Last quarter it earned a 9% CTR on 10,000 impressions, or 900 clicks. This quarter, rank is unchanged and impressions are 10,000, but an overview now shows and CTR is 4%, or 400 clicks. The page did not lose ranking; the SERP changed. The response is different from a ranking loss: you would not rewrite the page for relevance, you would test a sharper title and look for a citation opportunity. The numbers here are an illustration, not data from a client.
Three segments to protect first
- Money queries with commercial intent. Overviews trigger less often here, so check before assuming a loss.
- Queries where you hold the top spot and the brand matters. Even without a click, appearing in the result builds recognition.
- Long-tail questions that convert. These are where a unique data point or template earns clicks an overview cannot satisfy.
Setting targets when the benchmark is a range
A single blended CTR target will mislead you, so set three. First, a floor for queries with an overview, based on your own last 90 days at the same position. Second, a target for queries without one, which should sit closer to the classic curve. Third, a citation goal: how many of your priority queries show your brand inside the answer. Review all three monthly. If the floor holds while impressions rise, you are gaining visibility even where clicks are flat, and that is worth saying in the report.
What I would not conclude
- That SEO is dead. Impressions and citations still matter.
- That every query loses half its clicks. Navigational queries barely change.
- That AI referral traffic will replace lost clicks. Slate's summary quotes research that AI-sourced visitors show lower bounce and longer sessions, but volumes are small.
FAQ
How much does an AI Overview reduce CTR?
Studies differ. AWR's July 2026 US desktop data showed position 1 dropping 52%, Sistrix reported about 60% in Germany, and Ahrefs reportedly about 58% in 2025. A range of roughly half to three-fifths is defensible for overview queries.
What is average CTR for position 1 in 2026?
AWR reported 20.02% across all SERP types on US desktop in July 2026. Other vendors publish different figures, so use it as one reference and check your own data.
Do mobile and desktop CTRs differ?
Yes, in AWR's data they moved in opposite directions between February and May 2026. Benchmark each device separately.
Are these numbers from Google?
No. They are third-party studies. Google has not published a per-position CTR benchmark that I could verify.
Should I stop targeting informational queries?
Not automatically. Target them when you can earn a citation or offer something an overview cannot. Drop those where the fact is the whole answer and the business value is low.
Does being cited in an overview help?
A secondary source reports higher CTR and impressions for cited sites, but I could not verify the primary study. It is plausible and worth testing on your own pages.
How do I know if a drop is from AI Overviews?
Compare CTR at the same average position over two periods and check the SERP for an overview. Steady rank with lower CTR points to layout change.
What is the fastest fix?
Improve titles for queries that still show organic listings prominently, and add unique content an overview cannot replicate.
Work with me
I am Younus Fardeen, an organic growth, SEO and content strategist with 4+ years of marketing experience across edtech and startups. If you want help reading your own CTR data, see my work and contact me through the form at https://younusfardeen.in.
Sources: Advanced Web Ranking, "Google Organic CTR by Position: 2026 Study"; Slate, "Google AI Overviews Statistics" (summarising Sistrix, Ahrefs, Seer, Pew). Verified as of 30 September 2026.