What Is E-E-A-T?
E-E-A-T is a set of four concepts that Google's search quality raters use when they judge the quality of a web page. In the Search Quality Rater Guidelines (the edition online on October 7, 2026 is dated September 11, 2025), section 3.4 opens: “Experience, Expertise, Authoritativeness and Trust (E-E-A-T) are all important considerations in PQ rating. The most important member at the center of the E-E-A-T family is Trust.” PQ means Page Quality, one of the rating tasks Google gives its raters.
Google's guidance for site owners, Creating helpful, reliable, people-first content, uses the same letters but spells the last one out as trustworthiness: its systems look for factors that show “aspects of experience, expertise, authoritativeness, and trustworthiness, or what we call E-E-A-T.” The rater guidelines say “Trust”. Both refer to the same idea.
How Google's Rater Guidelines Define Each Letter
The rater guidelines define each part of E-E-A-T as a question for the rater, quoted below exactly as they appear in section 3.4. Trust is the main question. The guidelines describe Experience, Expertise and Authoritativeness as concepts that “can support your assessment of Trust”. They also say the three can overlap, and that different combinations matter for different topics.
| Letter | Definition in the rater guidelines (verbatim) | Guidelines' own example |
|---|---|---|
| Experience | “Consider the extent to which the content creator has the necessary first-hand or life experience for the topic.” | A product review from someone who has used the product, compared with a “review” by someone who has not |
| Expertise | “Consider the extent to which the content creator has the necessary knowledge or skill for the topic.” | Home rewiring advice from a skilled electrician, compared with advice from an antique homes enthusiast who knows nothing about wiring |
| Authoritativeness | “Consider the extent to which the content creator or the website is known as a go-to source for the topic.” | The official government page for passport renewal |
| Trust | “Consider the extent to which the page is accurate, honest, safe, and reliable.” | Online stores need secure payments and reliable customer service; product reviews should be honest |
The guidelines add that “most topics do not have one official, Authoritative website or content creator”, and that how much Trust a page needs depends on what kind of page it is. A social media post meant to entertain, on a topic that cannot cause harm, “may not need a high level of Trust”.
Where E-E-A-T Comes From
E-E-A-T comes from Google's Search Quality Rater Guidelines, the instructions Google gives the people who rate sample search results. Google added the first E, for Experience, on December 15, 2022. Before that the concept was E-A-T: expertise, authoritativeness and trustworthiness. Google's 2023 overview of the rater program says it has “~16,000 Search Quality Raters” around the world.
Approximate number of raters by region, as stated by Google, November 2023
Source: Google, Search Quality Rater Guidelines: An Overview, November 2023, page 18.
Google gives a total of ~16,000 raters speaking 80+ languages. All figures are Google's approximations; Google says rater data is not used directly in ranking.
Google announced the change in a Search Central blog post, “Our latest update to the quality rater guidelines: E-A-T gets an extra E for Experience”, by Elizabeth Tucker. It asked whether content shows “some degree of experience, such as with actual use of a product, having actually visited a place or communicating what a person experienced?” Its example contrasts two searches. For how to fill out a tax return, you probably want an accounting expert. For reviews of tax software, you may want a forum discussion among people who have used different services. The post called these “not fundamentally new ideas”. It also repeated that the guidelines are used to evaluate Google's ranking systems and “don't directly influence ranking.”
The rater guidelines themselves say the same in section 0.1: “No single rating can directly impact how a particular webpage, website, or result appears in Google Search”. Ratings are used instead “to measure how effectively search engines are working” and to give examples of helpful and unhelpful results.
Why Trust Is the Centre of E-E-A-T
Google treats Trust as the part of E-E-A-T that decides the outcome. The rater guidelines say: “Trust is the most important member of the E-E-A-T family because untrustworthy pages have low E-E-A-T no matter how Experienced, Expert, or Authoritative they may seem.” Their example is a financial scam, which is untrustworthy however expert the scammer is.
Two more rules in section 3.4 follow from this. First, conflicts of interest count against a page: “The website or content creator may not be a trustworthy source if there is a clear conflict of interest.” The guidelines give manufacturer “reviews” and reviews by paid influencers as examples. Second, Trust is wider than the other three letters: “If a page is untrustworthy for any reason, it has low E-E-A-T.” Google's site-owner page puts it the same way: “Of these aspects, trust is most important. The others contribute to trust, but content doesn't necessarily have to demonstrate all of them.”
How Google Uses E-E-A-T
Google says its automated systems look for a mix of factors linked to E-E-A-T, but that E-E-A-T is not one measurable thing in itself. The key sentence on Google's people-first content page, as of October 7, 2026, is: “While E-E-A-T itself isn't a specific ranking factor, using a mix of factors that can identify content with good E-E-A-T is useful.”
The same section says:
- Its systems “identify a mix of factors that can help determine which content demonstrates aspects of experience, expertise, authoritativeness, and trustworthiness”.
- “our systems give even more weight to content that aligns with strong E-E-A-T” for YMYL topics, defined below.
- “Search raters have no control over how pages rank. Rater data is not used directly in our ranking algorithms.” Google compares rater feedback to the feedback cards a restaurant collects from diners.
- “Reading the guidelines may help you self-assess how your content is doing from an E-E-A-T perspective”.
Google does not list the factors. The page then suggests asking “Who, How, and Why” about each piece of content. Who: “Something that helps people intuitively understand the E-E-A-T of content is when it's clear who created it.” Google says it “strongly encourage[s] adding accurate authorship information, such as bylines to content where readers might expect it.” How: explain how the content was produced, including any use of automation or AI. Why: Google calls this “perhaps the most important question”. Content made mainly to help people aligns “with E-E-A-T generally”; content made mainly to attract search visits does not.
In early October 2026 Google added a warning to the “Who” section: “Fabricating creator profiles (such as by using AI-generated headshots, made-up names, or false credentials to make content appear as if it was written by human experts) is a form of deception.” Our report on what Google changed in its content guidance in October 2026 compares the old and new versions of the page.
E-E-A-T and YMYL Topics
E-E-A-T matters most for “Your Money or Your Life” topics, where Google says it gives strong E-E-A-T even more weight. The rater guidelines (section 2.3) define them like this: “Some topics have a high risk of harm because content about these topics could significantly impact the health, financial stability, or safety of people, or the welfare or well-being of society. We call these topics ‘Your Money or Your Life’ or YMYL.”
The guidelines sort YMYL harm into four groups: Health or Safety; Financial Security; Government, Civics & Society; and Other. They also note that “Many or most topics are not YMYL”, and treat YMYL as a spectrum, from clear YMYL to definitely not.
Section 3.4.1 explains which kind of E-E-A-T a YMYL page needs. Information or advice on a clear YMYL topic may need “a high level of expertise”. Personal accounts can still rate well: “Pages that share first-hand life experience on clear YMYL topics may be considered to have high E-E-A-T as long as the content is trustworthy, safe, and consistent with well-established expert consensus.” In the guidelines' retirement example, reviews of savings services by people who have used them suit Experience. Advice on how much to save and what to invest in is “best left to Experts”.
What E-E-A-T Is Not
E-E-A-T is not a score, a tag or a ranking factor you can set. It is a framework that human raters use and that Google says its systems approximate through other signals. None of the Google documents cited in this explainer describes an E-E-A-T number, a markup property or a Search Console report.
- Not a ranking factor in itself. In Google's words, “E-E-A-T itself isn't a specific ranking factor.”
- Not a score. Raters give Page Quality ratings to sample pages. Google says no single rating changes how a page appears in Search. Third-party tools that publish an “E-E-A-T score” are using their own method, not Google's. The guidelines also tell raters that traffic estimates from sites like Similarweb “do not provide evidence of positive or negative reputation”.
- Not a tag or markup. Structured data can describe who wrote an article, but it cannot add Experience or Trust to a page. Our guide to adding Article structured data covers what author markup does and does not do.
- Not a penalty switch. The guidelines say that when raters find little or no reputation information about a small site, “This is not indicative of high or low quality.”
- Not only for health and finance. Every Page Quality rating considers E-E-A-T. YMYL pages get the most scrutiny.
E-E-A-T vs Related Terms
E-E-A-T is often confused with the concepts around it in Google's documentation. The table separates them, using Google's own definitions.
| Term | What it is | Where Google documents it | Relation to E-E-A-T |
|---|---|---|---|
| E-A-T | Expertise, authoritativeness, trustworthiness | Rater guidelines before December 2022 | The earlier name; Experience was added on December 15, 2022 |
| YMYL | Topics that could significantly affect health, financial stability, safety or the welfare of society | Rater guidelines, section 2.3 | Google gives strong E-E-A-T “even more weight” on these topics |
| Page Quality (PQ) rating | A rater task that scores sample pages | Rater guidelines, Part 1 | E-E-A-T is one of the considerations in a PQ rating |
| Main content quality | Effort, originality, talent or skill, and accuracy of the main content | Google, people-first content page | Google calls it one of the most critical factors “Beyond E-E-A-T” |
| Reputation | What independent sources say about a website or creator | Rater guidelines, section 3.3 | One of the main kinds of evidence raters use to judge E-E-A-T |
Common Misconceptions About E-E-A-T
Most misconceptions about E-E-A-T come from treating a rater framework as a technical setting. The table checks common claims against what Google's documents say.
| Myth | What the source actually says | Source |
|---|---|---|
| “E-E-A-T is a ranking factor.” | “E-E-A-T itself isn't a specific ranking factor”; systems use “a mix of factors” that can identify it | Google, people-first content |
| “Quality raters can demote my site.” | “Search raters have no control over how pages rank. Rater data is not used directly in our ranking algorithms.” | Google, people-first content |
| “All four letters carry equal weight.” | Trust is “the most important member”; content “doesn't necessarily have to demonstrate all of them” | Rater guidelines 3.4; Google |
| “Only credentialed experts can rate well.” | First-hand experience on YMYL topics can have high E-E-A-T if it is trustworthy, safe and consistent with expert consensus | Rater guidelines 3.4.1 |
| “Adding an author bio box fixes E-E-A-T.” | Google encourages “accurate authorship information” and calls fabricated creator profiles deception | Google, people-first content |
| “A website's claims about itself establish its authority.” | Raters are told to “Be skeptical of claims that websites make about themselves” and to look for independent sources | Rater guidelines 3.3.1 |
What Companies and Executives Can Do About E-E-A-T
For a company or executive, E-E-A-T comes down to the evidence a rater, or a system modelled on raters, can find about who you are. The rater guidelines (section 3.4) say this assessment “should be informed by one or more of” three sources. Each source suggests different work.
1. What you say about yourself
Raters start with “the ‘About us’ page on the website or profile page of the content creator”. Put real names on articles where readers would expect them, and link each byline to a page that sets out the author's background. Google's three “Who” questions are: is it obvious who wrote it, is there a byline where one would be expected, and does the byline lead to more information. Our explainers on author and expert bylines and on whether bylines affect credibility signals explain how bylines work on your own site and in other publications.
2. What others say about you
This is where independent coverage counts. The guidelines tell raters to look for “independent reviews, references, news articles, and other sources of credible information”. Section 3.3.1 lists “News articles, Wikipedia articles, blog posts, magazine articles, forum discussions, and ratings from independent organizations” as sources of reputation information. For YMYL topics, it says reputation “should be judged by what experts in the field have to say.” Our guide to review and reputation signals covers the third-party record a searcher finds. None of this is a ranking promise. It is the evidence the guidelines tell raters to look for.
3. What is visible on the page
Show the work. Google's “How” guidance suggests explaining how content was made, such as what was tested and how. It also suggests disclosing automation where readers would reasonably expect it. If AI helps produce content, Google's guidance on generative AI content says “it is critical to manually factcheck and review all AI-generated content” before publishing. Our explainer on whether Google penalises AI-generated coverage covers Google's policy. Avoid conflicts of interest you do not disclose: the guidelines rate paid “reviews” as less trustworthy.
Practical checklist
- Every article where a reader would expect an author carries an accurate byline, linked to a real profile.
- Your About page names the company, the people responsible and how to contact you.
- Claims about expertise (credentials, client results, awards) can be checked somewhere independent.
- Pages on YMYL topics are written or reviewed by someone qualified, and say so.
- Sponsored, affiliate or paid content is labelled.
- No fake personas, stock-photo “experts” or AI-generated headshots.
Frequently Asked Questions
What does E-E-A-T stand for?
Experience, Expertise, Authoritativeness and Trust. Google's rater guidelines use “Trust”; its Search Central guidance spells the last letter out as “trustworthiness”. Both mean the same concept.
Is E-E-A-T a Google ranking factor?
Not by itself. Google says “E-E-A-T itself isn't a specific ranking factor”. Its systems use a mix of other factors that can identify content with good E-E-A-T, and give that content more weight on YMYL topics.
When did Google add Experience to E-A-T?
On December 15, 2022, in an update to the Search Quality Rater Guidelines announced on the Google Search Central blog.
Do quality raters affect my site's rankings?
No. Google says raters “have no control over how pages rank” and that rater data is not used directly in its ranking algorithms. Ratings help Google measure whether its systems are working.
Can a page have good E-E-A-T without an expert author?
Yes, depending on the topic. The rater guidelines say pages sharing first-hand life experience on YMYL topics can have high E-E-A-T if they are trustworthy, safe and consistent with expert consensus. Advice such as investment or medical treatment guidance is “best left to Experts”.
Is there a tool that measures my E-E-A-T score?
Google does not publish one. None of the Google documents cited here describes an E-E-A-T score, report or markup. Third-party “E-E-A-T scores” reflect the vendor's own method.
Does schema markup improve E-E-A-T?
Markup can describe the author and publisher of a page, but it cannot add experience, expertise or trust. Google's guidance asks for accurate authorship information that readers can see, and calls fabricated creator profiles deception.
Does press coverage help E-E-A-T?
The rater guidelines tell raters to look for independent sources, including news articles, magazine articles and ratings from independent organisations, when judging a website's or creator's reputation. Google does not say how its automated systems weigh coverage, so coverage is evidence, not a ranking guarantee.
Where can I read the rater guidelines?
Google publishes them as a PDF at guidelines.raterhub.com and links to them from its Search Central page on creating helpful, reliable, people-first content. The edition served on October 7, 2026 is dated September 11, 2025.
Sources and Methodology
This explainer is built from Google's primary documents, read on October 7, 2026: the full Search Quality Rater Guidelines PDF (the version served that day is dated September 11, 2025, and runs to 182 pages), Google's 2023 overview of the rater program, the Search Central page on people-first content (last updated October 5, 2026, according to the page) and the December 2022 Search Central blog post. Definitions are quoted verbatim. We did not test how Google ranks pages, and Google does not publish the factors it uses to approximate E-E-A-T. Google's guidance changes, so quotations are dated to the day we read them.
- official Google, Search Quality Rater Guidelines (General Guidelines), September 11, 2025. Sections 0.1, 2.3, 3.3, 3.4 and 3.4.1. Read October 7, 2026.
- official Google, Search Quality Rater Guidelines: An Overview, November 2023. Read October 7, 2026.
- official Google Search Central, Creating helpful, reliable, people-first content. Read October 7, 2026.
- official Google Search Central, Google Search's Guidance on Generative AI Content on Your Website. Read October 7, 2026.
- official Elizabeth Tucker, Google Search Central Blog, Our latest update to the quality rater guidelines: E-A-T gets an extra E for Experience, December 15, 2022. Read October 7, 2026.