Cannibalization Audit from Search Console Daily Data

On a 12,000-URL site the standard tools flag several hundred cannibalization risks and we confirm between 30 and 60. The rest are false positives: two URLs that share a keyword but never appear in the same result set, or a category and a filter that Google resolved on its own eighteen months ago. Acting on the unfiltered list is worse than doing nothing, because merges are irreversible in practice and every one of them puts a converting URL at risk. What counts as a conflict here: We take the Search Console bulk export into BigQuery, which gives daily rows at query and URL level rather than the sampled interface view. A conflict is recorded when two URLs from your site both rank inside the top 20 for the same query on at least 20 percent of days across a 90-day window, and the joint click-through rate sits below the single-URL benchmark for that position band. Position alternation without click loss is not a conflict; it is Google testing, and it resolves without us. How each one is classified: Intent duplication, where two pages answer the same decision and one has to go. Template duplication, where a facet, a paginated series or a print view is competing with its own parent. Locale collision, where es-MX outranks es-ES on google.es because the hreflang return tags are missing on one side. And brand-versus-category, where a manufacturer page and a category page split the same demand. The classification determines the fix; skipping it is how sites end up 301-ing a page that was never the problem. The decision we hand you: Per conflict: the URL that survives, the reason, and one of five actions. Merge with a 301, consolidate with a canonical, differentiate the intent and keep both, noindex, or leave it alone. The fifth action appears more often than clients expect and we will not pad the count to justify the fee. Before any merge we pull assisted conversions from GA4 and, where you have it, closed revenue from the CRM. A page that ranks second and converts first does not get deleted because a tool called it weaker. What you receive: A redirect map as CSV, ready for the release, with source, target, action and the traffic and revenue attached to each row so the person approving it can see the exposure. Where a merge is large we mark it as a staged release rather than shipping 400 redirects in one night. On the standard engagement we also rewrite the surviving page's title and H1 where the conflict was created by two pages targeting the same phrase. Not included: New content. Internal linking rebuilds, which are separate work and usually the next thing you need. Migration execution: we specify the redirects, your team ships them, and we verify. Who this is not for: Sites with less than 16 months of Search Console history, because the seasonal comparison is what separates a conflict from a repositioning. Sites where bulk export to BigQuery is not enabled, unless you accept that we switch it on in week one and then wait for data before the analysis begins. And sites under a few thousand URLs, where the same answer comes out of an afternoon in the interface. Sectors: Energy retailers with overlapping tariff and switching pages, automotive groups where model, trim and city pages collide, and fintech where a product page and its regulatory explainer target the same phrase. Delivered in Spanish or English.