How to Reverse Engineer Google's Quality Raters Guidelines for Your Site

TL;DR

Google’s Quality Raters Guidelines (QRG) is a 170+ page document that tells human evaluators how to assess website quality. While raters don’t directly affect rankings, their assessments train Google’s algorithms. Understanding and applying QRG principles means: evaluating your site through the lens of expertise, authoritativeness, and trustworthiness (E-E-A-T), identifying and fixing “lowest quality” page characteristics, understanding Your Money or Your Life (YMYL) implications, and building the signals that raters look for. It’s a blueprint for what Google’s algorithms are trying to detect.

Do This Today (3 Quick Checks)

Find your “who” page: Can a visitor (or rater) easily find who is responsible for your content? About page, author bios, contact information?

Check your worst pages: What’s the lowest-quality page on your site? Thin content, outdated info, no author? Raters are told to find and evaluate these.

Assess YMYL applicability: Could your content affect someone’s health, finances, safety, or important life decisions? If yes, you’re held to higher standards.

Quality Raters Guidelines Core Framework

Page Quality (PQ) Rating Scale:

Rating	Description	Characteristics
<strong>Highest</strong>	Pages that achieve their purpose exceptionally well	Outstanding E-E-A-T, exceptional content, stellar reputation
<strong>High</strong>	Pages that serve their purpose well	High E-E-A-T, satisfying content, good reputation
<strong>Medium</strong>	Nothing wrong, nothing special	Adequate E-E-A-T, acceptable content
<strong>Low</strong>	Something significantly wrong	Missing E-E-A-T, unsatisfying content, mildly negative reputation
<strong>Lowest</strong>	Harmful, deceptive, or completely fails purpose	No E-E-A-T, dangerous/deceptive, very negative reputation

Self-Audit Scorecard

Rate each factor 1-5 (1=Poor, 5=Excellent)

E-E-A-T Signals:

Factor	Score (1-5)	Notes
<strong>Experience:</strong> Content shows first-hand experience
<strong>Expertise:</strong> Creator has relevant qualifications
<strong>Authoritativeness:</strong> Site/creator recognized in field
<strong>Trustworthiness:</strong> Accurate, transparent, safe
<strong>E-E-A-T Subtotal</strong>	/20

Content Quality:

Factor	Score (1-5)	Notes
<strong>Purpose clarity:</strong> Page purpose is clear
<strong>Purpose achievement:</strong> Page achieves its purpose
<strong>Comprehensiveness:</strong> Covers topic thoroughly
<strong>Accuracy:</strong> Information is factually correct
<strong>Originality:</strong> Provides unique value
<strong>Effort:</strong> Obvious effort invested in creation
<strong>Content Subtotal</strong>	/30

Website Quality:

Factor	Score (1-5)	Notes
<strong>Contact info:</strong> Easy to find who's responsible
<strong>About page:</strong> Clear who operates site
<strong>Policies:</strong> Privacy, editorial policies present
<strong>Reputation:</strong> External sources positive
<strong>Website Subtotal</strong>	/20

YMYL Specific (if applicable):

Factor	Score (1-5)	Notes
<strong>Expert involvement:</strong> Medical/legal/financial expertise
<strong>Source citation:</strong> Claims properly sourced
<strong>Disclaimers:</strong> Appropriate limitations stated
<strong>Update freshness:</strong> Information current
<strong>YMYL Subtotal</strong>	/20

Total Score Interpretation:

Score Range	QRG Equivalent	Action
81-90 (or 65-70 non-YMYL)	High-Highest	Maintain, minor improvements
61-80 (or 49-64 non-YMYL)	Medium-High	Targeted improvements
41-60 (or 33-48 non-YMYL)	Low-Medium	Significant work needed
<40 (or <32 non-YMYL)	Low-Lowest	Major overhaul required

Content Quality Checklist by Page Type

YMYL Health Content:

Requirement	Present?	Action Needed
Medical reviewer/author with credentials	☐
Credentials verifiable (linked)	☐
Sources cited (medical journals, health orgs)	☐
Date published visible	☐
Date last reviewed/updated visible	☐
Appropriate disclaimers	☐
Aligns with medical consensus	☐
No potentially harmful advice	☐

YMYL Financial Content:

Requirement	Present?	Action Needed
Financial professional author/reviewer	☐
Credentials and certifications listed	☐
Regulatory disclosures present	☐
Specific advice includes caveats	☐
No guarantees of returns	☐
Sources for data/statistics	☐

Product/Service Pages:

Requirement	Present?	Action Needed
Clear business identity	☐
Contact information accessible	☐
Refund/return policies	☐
Customer reviews/testimonials	☐
Product information accurate	☐
Pricing transparent	☐

The Conversation

Naomi, Content Strategy Lead at a health and wellness company, site was hit by a core update 8 months ago and hasn’t recovered, has heard about Quality Raters Guidelines but never read them thoroughly, looking for practical guidance on what to fix, advanced content background: We were hit by a core update 8 months ago. Traffic down 45%. I keep hearing about the Quality Raters Guidelines and E-E-A-T but when I try to read the guidelines, it’s overwhelming. How do I practically apply this to our health and wellness site?

SDC SEO Brain: Health and wellness is explicitly YMYL (Your Money or Your Life) in the guidelines. This means your site is evaluated with the highest scrutiny. Let’s break down what raters are instructed to look for and how to systematically audit your site against those criteria.

Naomi: What exactly is YMYL and why does it matter?

SDC SEO Brain: YMYL pages are those that could significantly impact a person’s future happiness, health, financial stability, or safety. Google applies higher quality standards because mistakes cause real harm.

YMYL categories:

Health and safety (your category)
Financial information
News and current events
Civics, government, law
Shopping (transactions)
Groups of people (sensitive topics)
Other (major life decisions)

For your health content, raters are asking: “If someone follows this advice, could it hurt them? Is this information from qualified sources?”

Naomi: How do raters actually evaluate our pages?

SDC SEO Brain: The QRG instructs raters to evaluate:

1. Purpose of the page

What is this page trying to accomplish?
Does it achieve that purpose?

2. E-E-A-T signals

Experience: Has the creator actually experienced what they’re writing about?
Expertise: Does the creator have relevant knowledge or skill?
Authoritativeness: Is the creator or site recognized as a go-to source?
Trustworthiness: Is the content and site trustworthy?

3. Main Content quality

Effort put into creation
Originality
Accuracy
Comprehensiveness for purpose

4. Website and creator reputation

What do external sources say?
Reviews, references, expert opinions

Let’s systematically audit your site. First question: who writes your health content?

Naomi: Mix of freelancers and our in-house team. Freelancers are mostly content writers, not health professionals. In-house team includes some people with health backgrounds.

SDC SEO Brain: That’s a significant E-E-A-T problem for YMYL content. The QRG specifically states:

“For YMYL topics, the everyday experience of the content creator is often less important than formal expertise.”

For health content, raters look for:

Medical credentials (doctors, nurses, registered dietitians)
Relevant academic credentials
Professional experience in the field
Institutional backing

Content from generic freelancers with no health credentials gets rated lower for health topics, regardless of how well it’s written.

Naomi: So we need to hire doctors to write everything?

SDC SEO Brain: Options for improving creator E-E-A-T:

Option 1: Medical review

Content can be written by non-experts
Reviewed and approved by credentialed expert
Clearly state: “Reviewed by Dr. X, MD”
Link to reviewer’s credentials

Option 2: Expert authorship

Hire experts to write key content
Feature their credentials prominently
More expensive but strongest signal

Option 3: Expert interviews

Interview experts and quote them
“According to Dr. X…”
Cite credentials

Option 4: Institutional affiliation

Partner with medical institutions
Associate content with trusted organizations
Advisory board involvement

Naomi: What should author pages look like?

SDC SEO Brain: The QRG specifically says raters should “look for information about who is responsible for the website and who created the content.” Your author pages should include:

For health content authors:

Full name (not pseudonyms for YMYL)
Photo (real, professional)
Credentials (degrees, certifications, licenses)
Experience (years in field, areas of expertise)
Current position/affiliation
Links to credentials (LinkedIn, medical board, etc.)
Other content they’ve created
Contact information (optional but trust-building)

Bad author bio:
“Jane is a health and wellness writer passionate about helping people live better lives.”

Good author bio:
“Dr. Jane Smith, MD, is a board-certified internal medicine physician with 15 years of clinical experience. She completed her residency at Massachusetts General Hospital and currently practices at Boston Medical Center. Dr. Smith specializes in preventive medicine and has published research in the Journal of General Internal Medicine.”

Naomi: What about the content itself? What are raters looking for?

SDC SEO Brain: For YMYL health content, raters evaluate:

Accuracy:

Is information factually correct?
Does it align with medical consensus?
Are sources cited?
Could following this advice cause harm?

Comprehensiveness:

Does content cover what users need?
Are important caveats mentioned?
Does it address common questions/concerns?

Transparency:

Sources cited and linked
Date published and last updated
Clear about limitations
Disclaimers where appropriate

Practical audit: Take your top 10 health articles and check:

Is there a medical review or expert author?
Are claims cited with sources?
Is there a publish/update date?
Does it cover the topic comprehensively?
Are there appropriate disclaimers?

Naomi: We have a lot of old content. Some of it is probably outdated.

SDC SEO Brain: The QRG specifically addresses outdated content as a quality issue:

“Consider whether the MC [Main Content] has been updated as appropriate for the topic. For some topics, such as YMYL topics related to health or safety, the newest information may be essential.”

Outdated health content is particularly problematic. Medical guidelines change. What was accurate 5 years ago may be wrong now.

Content freshness audit:

List all health content
Check last updated date
Research if topic has changed since publication
Prioritize update by: traffic, revenue, criticality of accuracy
Either update, add “no longer current” notice, or remove

Naomi: What about site-wide trust signals?

SDC SEO Brain: Raters evaluate the entire website’s trustworthiness:

Contact information:

Physical address (especially for YMYL)
Customer service contact
Multiple contact methods

About page:

Who owns/operates the site
Mission and purpose
Background and history

Policies:

Privacy policy
Editorial standards
Corrections policy
Advertising disclosure

Reputation:

What do external sources say?
Reviews on third-party sites
Press coverage
BBB rating
Expert citations

Raters are instructed to search for “[brand] reviews” and “[brand] reputation” to find external opinions.

Naomi: How do I know if we’re making progress?

SDC SEO Brain: Unfortunately, there’s no “quality score” you can check. But you can:

Self-audit against QRG:

Rate your own pages using QRG criteria
Be brutally honest
Document scores, track improvements

External perspective:

Hire someone unfamiliar with your site to evaluate using QRG
Ask: “Would you trust this health advice?”
Gather feedback on author credibility

Competitor benchmarking:

Evaluate competitor sites using same criteria
Where are they stronger?
What signals do ranking sites have that you don’t?

Proxy metrics:

User engagement (do people stay and engage?)
Bounce rate on YMYL content
Conversion rate (trust → action)
Brand search volume (growing recognition)

FAQ

Q: Do Quality Raters directly affect rankings?
A: No, rater evaluations don’t directly change rankings. Their assessments train and validate Google’s algorithms. But the QRG reveals what Google’s algorithms are trying to detect.

Q: How do I get the Quality Raters Guidelines?
A: Google publicly publishes them. Search “Google Quality Raters Guidelines” or go to: https://static.googleusercontent.com/media/guidelines.raterhub.com/en//searchqualityevaluatorguidelines.pdf

Q: Is E-E-A-T a ranking factor?
A: Not directly as an algorithm score. But the signals that demonstrate E-E-A-T (authorship, citations, expertise) are what algorithms learn to recognize from rater feedback.

Q: How strictly should non-YMYL sites follow QRG?
A: QRG applies to all sites but with different thresholds. YMYL requires highest standards. Non-YMYL has more flexibility but still benefits from E-E-A-T signals.

Q: Can a site recover from low quality scores?
A: Yes. If you genuinely improve the signals raters look for, algorithms will eventually reflect that. But recovery takes time, often 3-6+ months.

Summary

Quality Raters Guidelines reveal what Google’s algorithms are learning to detect. Understanding QRG = understanding Google’s quality standards.

YMYL content requires highest standards:

Health, finance, safety, major life decisions
Real expertise required, not just good writing
Accuracy is critical; mistakes cause harm

E-E-A-T evaluation:

Experience: Actual first-hand experience
Expertise: Credentials, formal knowledge
Authoritativeness: Recognition as go-to source
Trustworthiness: Honest, transparent, reliable

Author signals matter:

Real names with credentials
Verifiable backgrounds
Medical review for health content
Prominent author pages with full information

Content quality factors:

Accuracy (correct, current)
Comprehensiveness (covers topic fully)
Sources (cited and credible)
Freshness (updated for changing topics)

Site-wide trust signals:

Contact information
About page with real information
Clear policies
Positive external reputation

Audit your site as a rater would:

Evaluate against QRG criteria
Be honest about weaknesses
Compare to ranking competitors
Improve systematically

Sources

Google Quality Raters Guidelines (official): https://static.googleusercontent.com/media/guidelines.raterhub.com/en//searchqualityevaluatorguidelines.pdf
Google Search Central: E-E-A-T – https://developers.google.com/search/docs/fundamentals/creating-helpful-content
Google: Core updates guidance – https://developers.google.com/search/blog/2019/08/core-updates

SDC SEO