---
name: page-or-cluster-shape-decision
description: Use when a topic could plausibly be one long page or a hub with several supporting pages, and the team is deciding by word count or by copying a competitor.
---

# Decide One Page or a Cluster

This is expensive to get wrong in both directions. Split a topic Google treats as one and the pages compete for the same result; merge a topic Google treats as several and you rank properly for none of them. Teams normally settle it by how much there is to say, which is a fact about your material rather than about the SERP. The evidence is in the results pages for the sub-queries and takes about an hour to read.

## Was Sie vorher brauchen

- the full query list for the topic including question phrasings, with volumes
- the live top 10 for the head query and for at least 4 sub-queries, checked manually
- your realistic capacity for this topic over the next two months

## Methode

1. Pull the top 10 for the head term and for each sub-query. Where the same URLs rank across all of them, Google is treating this as one page and one page is what you should build.
2. Where sub-queries return different URLs from the same domains, that is a cluster: those sites hold the head term with a hub and the sub-queries with dedicated pages, which is the structure being rewarded.
3. Open the ranking pages and check whether any single one covers several sub-queries in its own headings. A page holding three sub-queries under H2s is telling you those sub-queries are sections, not pages.
4. Test each sub-query for independent format need. If answering it properly requires a different page type such as a calculator, a comparison table or a downloadable template, it needs its own URL whatever the SERP overlap suggests.
5. Size the cluster against capacity before committing. A hub with two of five spokes live usually performs worse than the single page it replaced, so if the whole set cannot ship inside two months, build one page now and split it later.
6. For a cluster, write the URL structure and the internal links in both directions before drafting: the hub links down to every spoke using the spoke target phrasing, each spoke links up using the hub phrasing. Retrofitting these after publication is how spokes end up orphaned.
7. For a single page, record which sub-queries were folded in and the impressions threshold at which you would split one back out, so the decision gets revisited on evidence rather than reopened as an opinion.

## Was dabei herauskommt

A per topic shape decision naming single page or hub plus spokes, with URLs, internal link directions, and the condition that would reverse it.

## Wo es schiefgeht

- splitting a topic into a cluster because it yields more pages to report against, then watching the spokes cannibalise the hub on the head term
- shipping the hub first and leaving spokes unfinished, so the hub is a thin index page linking to almost nothing
- copying a competitor structure when their hub ranks on domain strength rather than on the structure itself

---

Aus der QuQi-Skill-Bibliothek - https://www.quqi.io/de/skills/page-or-cluster-shape-decision