Skip to main content

Case Studies

Proof, not theatre.
Before and after, scoped to exactly what the work moved. No white-labeled wins, no borrowed dashboards.
Steve Lee, Founder of SEO Aesthetic·Written July 14, 2026·Updated July 30, 2026·5 min read
On This Page
  1. 1. How we report results
  2. 2. Selected case studies
  3. 3. What to take from them
Summary & Key Takeaways
  • Real outcomes from real client work, scoped honestly.
  • We show the before and the after, and what specifically changed.
  • Results are framed against what the data supports, never inflated.
  • Case studies map to the services and platform that produced them.

1. How we report results

Most agencies wave one win out of fifty clients and call it a track record, with the failures quietly left off the page. We scope each case study to what the work actually moved, with a clear before and after and the timeframe it took, because radical honesty is the brand and a case study that hides its caveats is just an ad. If a result depended on factors outside SEO, a product change, a pricing move, a season, we say so plainly. The point is for you to judge whether the same approach would work for you, which a dishonest case study makes impossible.

2. Selected case studies

E-commerce: category visibility
How entity-rich category hubs lifted AI citations across a catalog.
SaaS: owning the problem space
Topical authority that put a tool on the AI short list for its category.
Brand: fixing the entity
Correcting inconsistent brand facts so engines described the brand accurately.
Publisher: cited on the beat
Structured depth that earned citations when AI summarized the topic.

3. What to take from them

The throughline across all of them is method, not luck: the same semantic SEO, the same topical authority work, and the same measurement on the platform, applied to each different context. That is deliberate, because a track record only means something if the thing that produced it repeats. One lucky win tells you nothing. The same method producing results across very different verticals is the actual claim we are making, and it is the one the case studies are built to let you check.
FROM THE LAB · AN EXPERIMENT I RAN
I ran our own case studies through the citation test and killed the ones with no real number

I audited our own case studies the cold way an engine would read them, looking for something to actually extract. The ones that earned attention had a specific before, a specific after, and a clear mechanism connecting the two. The ones that just said we improved things were ignored, instantly, because there was nothing concrete to pull out or trust.

We rewrote the soft ones around real, specific outcomes and the actual structure of what changed and why. The difference in how they landed was immediate and a little embarrassing. A case study without a number and a mechanism is just a testimonial wearing a lab coat and hoping you do not look closely.

A case study is only as credible as the number you are willing to put in it.

HOT TAKE · THE PART NOBODY SAYS OUT LOUD
Most case studies are vague on purpose, and everyone reading can tell

The typical agency case study is deliberately, artfully fuzzy: increased visibility, drove growth, transformed performance. The vagueness is a choice, not an accident, and it quietly broadcasts that there is no real number anyone is willing to print. Readers discount it on sight, and so does any engine trying to extract a single concrete claim from it.

A credible case study names the situation, the action, and the measured result, even, especially, when the result is modest. Specificity is the entire point of the format. If you will not commit to a single number, do not publish a case study at all. Publish a brochure and have the honesty to call it one.

WHY THIS BEATS THE PASTE-AND-SHIP SHOPS
You cannot fabricate a case study, and the commodity shops have nothing real to put in one

Here is the real reason commodity shops have thin, foggy case studies: when the work itself is generic and was never measured, there is simply no real story to tell. So the case studies stay vague forever, because any specificity at all would expose that nothing measurable actually happened.

Real case studies come from real, measured work done by people who can explain exactly what moved and why, without hand-waving. That is only ever possible when the work was senior and instrumented from the first day. The depth of an agency’s case studies is a direct, unforgiving readout of the depth of its actual work.

Show me an agency with vague case studies and I will show you an agency with vague work.

Want results like these, scoped honestly?
Book a consultation and we will tell you what is realistic for your site, with no inflated promises.
Book a Consultation
Frequently asked questions
Are these results typical?
We scope each study honestly and avoid cherry-picking. Outcomes depend on starting point, market, and effort.
Why so few vanity metrics?
Because they are easy to fake. We report what the work actually moved.
Can you share references?
Where clients permit, yes. Ask during a consultation.
References
  1. 1. Google Search Central. Documentation on ranking and AI features.
  2. 2. Schema.org. Structured data vocabulary.
  3. 3. Google. Search Quality Rater Guidelines on demonstrated expertise.
  4. 4. Schema.org. Article and Review vocabulary.