What Was &num=100 , And What Just Changed?
For a long time, users were able to see 100 organic results on a single page by simply adding &num=100 to a Google Search URL. It was, for instance, the URL: https://www.google.com/search?q=keyword&num=100 which, when opened, showed not ten but a hundred search results (organic) on the user’s page. This was something that was neither documented publicly nor officially supported by Google, but, in practice, it was performed consistently without any problems by the rank trackers, SEO scripts, and power users.
Mid-September 2025 came with news from the SEO community that the &num=100 parameter was yielding only 10 results instead of 100. &num=100 had stopped working (or had started being ignored) without any announcement.
Later on, Google confirmed that the &num=100 parameter is “not something that we formally support.” However, the change made by Google as well as its permanence is still uncertain, as reported by Search Engine Land.
The Immediate Consequences
While the removal may seem insignificant, it is still capable of causing changes throughout the whole SEO infrastructure, reporting, and strategy. These are the main disruptions that have been noticed so far:
1. Tooling & Scraping Efficiency Collapses
In the past, one HTTP request could get 100 search results. At present, tools need to make 10 requests (one per page) in order to have the same data. That means that there has been a 10× increase in crawl load, bandwidth, processing time, and infrastructure cost.
As reported by RedCore Digital, some SEO tool vendors (e.g. rank trackers) have reported that they lack data and have had their dashboards broken. Additionally, some are also experiencing updating delays while they are restructuring their systems. Some have already started to limit their depth of tracking (e.g. only going up to top 20 or top 50) even further.
2. Google Search Console (GSC) Data Realignment
Several SEO specialists have reported that their GSC metrics underwent sudden and significant changes (particularly impressions and average position) from around September 10-12, 2025, onwards. The following were the findings found in a blog of Search Engine Land:
- Impressions fell for approximately 87.7% of sites in the sample of 319 properties analyzed by SEO analyst Tyler Gargula.
- Those sites were the ones that disclosed lost ranking keywords (unique queries) in the largest number i.e. 77.6% of them.
- Average position changed (i.e. got closer to “1”) for many sites, as lower-position impressions (which were most suitable for bots/tools via &num=100) were eliminated from the dataset.
- Clicks did not vary much in a considerable number of instances because actual user behavior was the same, it was the measurement that changed, not the traffic.
To put it briefly: some of the “data collapse” phenomena that many SEOs interpret now is made up of the removal of artificially inflated or bot-driven impressions.
3. Interpretation Risks & Client Communication
Since a great number of SEO teams as well as stakeholders are heavily depending on such metrics like impressions, average position, and keyword visibility, this change can result in a misunderstanding. Clients might become worried and, therefore, may conclude that not only SEO is dead but also an algorithm update was given to them. While the real cause of the problem is the change in data measurement. Several SEO blogs have been warning about the issue of misinterpretation risks.
Moreover, as a consequence of the fact that some lower-ranked keywords may become undisclosed in the reports of tools, the strategists may take the risk of not finding future possibilities because they do not show in the dashboards.
Theories Behind Google’s Move
While Google just briefly mentioned that the parameter would not be supported without going into much detail, several theories hypothesizing what might be the reason for such a move have been around in the SEO community for some time. These theories are supported by trends that can be observed, as well as by the pressures faced by the industry.
1. Reducing Bot & Scraping Traffic
The easiest explanation of the motivation behind: turning off &num=100 will slow down most large-scale scrapers significantly and will make it more expensive for them to continue. In other words, such tools, as well as bots, exploited this option to fastly gather vast SERP data with very few requests. Google can thus consider this to be an extra load to its system.
2. Dealing with Impression Inflation & “Noise” from Bots
People claim that some reason for activity of Google developers in this regard may be their desire to cleanse the Google Search Console (GSC) data of bot-driven impressions that generates noise. Such noise implies the presence of false data. Hence, this would contribute a lot to the reliability of these reports since impressions would be the truest representative of what humans see.
3. Fairing AI / LLM Scraping for Model Training
Another suggestion which is although a more recent one and quite frequently referenced, is that Google wants to stop the release of large language models (LLMs) and AI systems. This is from mass scraping of SERPs for training or summarizing purposes. So, by implementing the deep SERP crawl as a pricey activity, Google restrains AI models from easily accessing the structured search result data to mine. To understand how LLMs work and why this matters, check out Learn How LLMs Work. This article explains their core mechanisms and impact on search and content discovery.
For practical strategies to improve visibility in AI-driven search, explore AI Search Optimization Tips, which provides actionable advice for optimizing your content in AI-powered search environments.
How to Adapt: Practical Steps for SEOs and Site Owners
Even if the disturbance is undeniable, it is still possible to alleviate its impact. Here is an outline of strategies:
1. Don’t Panic- Focus on Core Metrics
- Realize that the organic traffic of your site, the number of clicks on it, and the conversions are the most important things. And these should be little affected by the current change.
- It is quite likely that you will see a reduction in the number of impressions and an “improvement” in the average position in your reports. But this does not automatically mean that the performance of your site has changed either way.
2. Communicate Transparently with Stakeholders
In case you are responsible for SEO of clients, make the point of this change clear. Present it as a change in how things are measured rather than a drop in the performance. Also, give them the time frame (mid-September 2025) to help them feel more comfortable.
3. Reassess Your Tooling Strategy
- Judge the rank trackers that are adjusting well. Some have already limited the default depth of their searches (e.g., top 20).
- Look for subscription price increases or a split in the tiers that occur as a result of tools having higher infrastructure costs.
- It is necessary to change the logic of custom scrapers or internal tools to allow multiple requests to be paged through while following the rate limits and anti-bot protections.
4. Prioritize the First Page & High-Impact Keywords
In the case where the results that are further away (beyond page 2 or 3) become less visible, the effect of making sure that your high-value content ranks in the top 10 (or top 20) should be strengthened.
5. Use Multi-Metric Validation
Do not entirely depend on keyword or impression figures. Use them alongside:
- Organic traffic & session trends (Google Analytics, etc.)
- Conversion or engagement metrics related to organic visitors
- Search Console click and query data (qualitative insights)
- Competitor tracking (external tools) to triangulate real-world ranking shifts
6. Document Shifts & Historical Baselines
Record pre-change baselines (early September 2025) to compare with the future trends. Add explanations to the dashboards and reports to indicate “&num=100 retirement” as a significant event.
Conclusion
Google taking away the &num=100 parameter is not just a small sidebar in the technical world. It is a fundamental change in how SEO and search visibility are measured. The change eliminates a long-standing “loophole” that many trackers exploited to collect large volumes of SERP data.
Nonetheless, the essence of the matter is that your offline metrics of success (clicks, users, conversions) may have remained the same, only that the way you visualize them has changed. Adaptation entails rethinking the use of tools, giving more prominence to core metrics, and ensuring open communication. Although the SEO industry may be experiencing turbulence, the ones who will turn the situation to their advantage by making a strategic move and dealing more effectively with cleaner, human-centric data are the ones to be reckoned with.
