Does Geotagging Photos Improve Google Business Profile Rankings?

A comprehensive 10-week study published by Search Engine Land has finally provided clarity on a topic long debated by local SEO professionals: Does geotagging images help improve Google Business Profile (GBP) rankings?

The study set out to answer this question with a large sample size, a controlled testing methodology, and multiple ranking metrics—and the results may surprise you.

What Is Geotagging and Why Do SEOs Use It?

Geotagging involves embedding GPS coordinates into the EXIF (Exchangeable Image File) data of photos. When these geotagged images are uploaded to a Google Business Profile, the theory is that Google could use the embedded location data as a local ranking signal.

This theory makes intuitive sense—especially since most smartphones automatically include EXIF location data. However, critics argue this practice is unreliable because:

• EXIF data can be easily manipulated

• Google strips EXIF data in many cases

• Google’s John Mueller has repeatedly stated that geotagging has no SEO benefit

Overview of the Study: Testing the SEO Impact of Geotagged Images

Search Engine Land’s study was designed to settle the debate with real data.

Test Setup

• Duration: 10 weeks

• Sample Size: 27 lawn care business locations

• Control Period: 5 weeks (no EXIF data in images)

• Test Period: 5 weeks (EXIF data with targeted geocoordinates added)

• Posting Schedule: 2 images per week per location (Tuesdays and Thursdays)

• Tools Used: Local Falcon for rank tracking and reporting

 Targeting

Two towns per client were selected (e.g., Little Falls and Garrisonville) that needed ranking improvement.

• Tuesday images were geotagged for Town A

• Thursday images were geotagged for Town B

Each week, rankings were monitored for:

• “Lawn care near me”

• “Lawn care [Town A]”

• “Lawn care [Town B]”

This setup allowed the researchers to evaluate whether geotagged photos influenced rankings across both generalized and location-specific queries.

Key Findings from the Study

The study uncovered a complex relationship between geotagged images and local search rankings. Here’s a breakdown of the main insights across different query types and metrics.

1. “Near Me” Queries Showed Improvement in Targeted Areas

For queries like “lawn care near me” within the towns where images were geotagged, rankings increased significantly. This was the only area where geotagging demonstrated a statistically significant positive effect.

This suggests that Google may use geotagged EXIF data to better match businesses with geographically relevant “near me” searches—at least in those specifically tagged locations.

2. City-Based Queries Declined in Rank

Conversely, rankings for queries like “lawn care [city name]” in the geotagged locations showed a consistent decline during the test period.

This pattern held across nearly all locations and contradicts the goal of increasing visibility for searches that include specific town names.

3. No Improvement at the Business’s Physical Address

When analyzing rankings at the Center of Business Address (where the business is actually pinned on the map), geotagging had no positive effect. In fact, rankings at the physical address declined when EXIF-tagged images targeted different towns.

4. No Rank Gains Across Broader Service Areas

Metrics such as Average Total Rank Position (ATRP) and Share of Local Voice (SoLV)—which track visibility across the entire service area—also showed no improvement. In some cases, rankings dropped further when images were geotagged.

This undermines the idea that adding images with coordinates for different parts of the service area would boost overall visibility.

Summary of Metric Results

Out of seven core ranking metrics tracked in the study:

• 1 metric showed measurable improvement: “near me” rankings in the geotagged area.

• 6 metrics showed no benefit from geotagging.

• Of those six, four showed a noticeable decline in rankings.

The overwhelming conclusion: geotagging offers limited upside, and even potential downside, depending on how it’s used.

Should You Geotag Your GBP Images?

Based on this data, the answer is generally no—at least not as a primary local SEO tactic.

Here’s why:

• You may improve “near me” rankings in a very narrow geographic zone—but hurt rankings elsewhere.

• You'll need to geotag and upload dozens or hundreds of images to cover an entire service area, which can overwhelm your GBP with low-quality or redundant photos.

• City-specific queries, which often have high intent, may actually perform worse when geotagging is applied inconsistently.

The researchers concluded that this trade-off isn’t worth it—and that image quality and relevance should be prioritized over EXIF data manipulation.

Bottom line: Geotagging does not deliver scalable, consistent local SEO results.

Instead of focusing on EXIF data, businesses and marketers should invest in:

• High-quality, original images that reflect real services and customer experiences

• Consistent GBP posts and Q&A updates

• Strong service area configuration

• Gathering and responding to reviews

• Content that reinforces location relevance on the business website

Until further evidence proves otherwise, geotagging should not be relied upon as a core local SEO tactic.