Google quality raters do not rate the content that Google indexes in any exhaustive or direct way, and their ratings are not used as a signal attached to your specific pages.
-
They don’t review all (or even most) indexed content.
-
They don’t directly change where your site ranks.
-
They are a feedback loop to tune and validate algorithm changes, not a manual curation layer.
That’s why treating E‑E‑A‑T as if humans were grading every page is fundamentally the wrong model.
Problems with EEAT in SEO
Other Problems with EEAT include
-
Subjective and moving target. The Quality Rater Guidelines explicitly ask raters to use judgment about experience, expertise, and trust, which are inherently qualitative and context‑dependent. Different raters (and users) can rate the same page differently over time; Google accepts that.
-
No E‑E‑A‑T score, no checklist. Multiple explainers explicitly debunk the idea that Google assigns a numeric E‑E‑A‑T score or that you can “optimize for E‑E‑A‑T” like page speed. That supports the instinct that E‑E‑A‑T has been blown way out of proportion by SEOs selling checklists and audits.
-
Google does not literally verify CV claims. Google has no documented system that checks “20 years of experience” against external employment records, and Google spokespeople have said things like author bios and “reviewed by an expert” labels are not used as direct ranking signals.
Other E-E-A-T Questions
Is there an EEAT scorecard?
No there is no EEAT Scorecard
But I really want EEAT to exist
That’s nice but its not going to “fix content” – there are just too many issues for E-E-A-T as a framework or guidelines in SEO
