Platform SEO
App Store Optimization (ASO)
ASO gets your app found and downloaded. We optimise keywords, titles, descriptions, screenshots and ratings strategy for the Apple App Store and Google Play, then tune the listing for conversion.
Who it is for: App owners who need more organic installs without raising paid acquisition spend.
Everything in this service
- Keyword research for app store search
- Title, subtitle and description optimisation
- Screenshot and preview creative direction
- Ratings and review strategy
- Conversion tuning and A/B listing tests
- Monthly ranking and install reporting
What to expect
- Higher rankings for the searches your users make
- A listing that converts browsers into installs
- Lower blended cost per install
How app store optimization actually works
The two stores index you differently
The single most important thing to understand about app store optimisation is that Apple and Google build their search indexes from different inputs, so the same listing copy cannot serve both well.
Apple indexes a small, defined set of fields. The app name, the subtitle, and a hidden keyword field of one hundred characters. The long description is not indexed for search at all, which surprises people who have spent weeks writing it. That constraint makes the work precise: roughly one hundred and fifty characters of indexed text to carry every term you want to rank for, with no repetition allowed because Apple already combines terms across fields into phrases.
Google Play works the other way. There is no keyword field. Play indexes the title, the short description and the full long description, so the long description is your keyword surface and it needs writing accordingly: naturally, readably, with your terms present at a sensible density rather than stuffed. Stuffing is against Play policy and reads badly to the humans who decide whether to install.
- Apple: name, subtitle and a hidden one hundred character keyword field are what get indexed
- Apple: never repeat a word across fields, since terms are combined automatically
- Play: title, short description and long description all feed the index
- Play: the long description carries the keyword work, written to be read
- Two separate listings maintained, not one copied across
Finding the terms worth competing for
App store search behaviour is different from web search behaviour. Queries are shorter, more brand-heavy, and much more category oriented. A large share of store searches are for a specific app by name, which you cannot win unless you are that app, so the workable opportunity sits in category and problem terms.
We build the term list from several sources. Store autocomplete, which shows what the store itself considers common. Competitor listings, which reveal what similar apps are targeting. The vocabulary in your own reviews, because users describe your app in the words they would search for. Search Console and web analytics if you also have a site, which often catches problem-led phrasing.
Then we prioritise by realism. A high-volume term where the top results are apps with millions of ratings is not a target for a new app. The productive zone is terms with genuine volume where the incumbents are weak, plus long-tail phrases that are specific enough that a well-matched app can win them. That is where installs come from in the first six months.
- Store autocomplete for the phrasings the store already recognises
- Competitor listing analysis for category term coverage
- Review vocabulary, since users write the words they would search
- Difficulty judged against incumbent rating volume, not just search volume
- Long-tail specificity as the realistic entry point
Creatives are where the installs are won or lost
Ranking gets you seen. Screenshots decide whether you get installed. Most people scan the first two screenshots and the icon, and make a decision before reading a word of the description. That makes creative work the highest-value part of ASO for most apps, and the part most often left to whatever the designer produced at launch.
The pattern that works is a first screenshot that states the single main benefit in a few large words over a clear device frame, followed by screenshots each carrying one further benefit in the same visual system. Screenshots that are raw untitled app views waste the slot, because a stranger cannot tell what they are looking at. Captions carry the message, the interface supports it.
Both stores support preview videos and both reward a well-made one, with the caution that a video that autoplays badly or opens weakly can perform worse than a strong screenshot set. We treat the video as a test, not an assumption.
- First screenshot carries the main benefit in large, readable text
- One clear message per screenshot, in a consistent visual system
- Icon tested for legibility at actual size against category competitors
- Localised creative for the markets that matter, not just translated text
- Preview video treated as something to test rather than assume
Testing properly rather than guessing
Google Play provides store listing experiments, which run real traffic splits on your live listing and report the difference in install rate with a confidence measure. Apple provides product page optimisation, which does the same on the App Store. These are the two most useful tools in ASO and they are underused, mostly because running a test properly requires patience.
The discipline is one variable at a time and enough traffic to reach significance. Change the icon and the first screenshot and the subtitle at once, and a lift tells you nothing about which change caused it. Stop a test early because the numbers look good on day three, and you have measured noise. Low-traffic apps need to accept longer test windows or larger changes.
We keep a running log of every test, its result and the conclusion drawn. Over a year that log becomes the most valuable asset in the account, because it encodes what your specific audience responds to rather than what worked for someone else.
- One variable per test, run to a real confidence threshold
- Test windows sized to your traffic, not to impatience
- Store-native testing tools used, since they measure the actual decision point
- Every test logged with its result, whether it won or lost
Ratings and reviews, done within the rules
Rating average and volume affect both ranking and conversion, and the conversion effect is the larger of the two. The gap between a 3.8 and a 4.5 average changes install rate substantially at the same position, because the star display sits directly in the results.
The legitimate way to improve it is to ask well and to ask at the right moment. Both platforms provide native in-app review prompts and require you to use them rather than custom dialogs. The prompt should fire after a user has completed something that went well, not on second launch before they have experienced anything. Frequency limits are enforced by the platform, so timing matters more than volume of asking.
What we never do is buy reviews, incentivise positive ones, or use gating that only routes happy users to the store. All of that breaches platform policy and it also breaches the FTC rule on consumer reviews and testimonials, which carries real penalties. Beyond the legal position, it is a bad trade: the reviews get removed, the app can get pulled, and you learn nothing about why users were unhappy. Responding properly to negative reviews, and fixing what they describe, moves the average more durably.
- Native in-app prompts, triggered after a genuine success moment
- Every review responded to, including and especially the negative ones
- Fixes shipped in response to recurring complaints, then reviewers told
- No bought, incentivised or gated reviews, without exception
Conversion feeds ranking, so the loop compounds
Both stores factor install behaviour into ranking. An app that converts a high share of the people who view its listing gets shown more, which brings more views, which produces more installs. The reverse is also true and it is why a poorly converting listing stays stuck even after keyword work improves its visibility.
That loop is the reason we do not sell keyword optimisation as a standalone service. Ranking an unconvincing listing higher produces a brief lift in impressions and no durable gain. Improving the listing first means that every subsequent visibility gain compounds instead of leaking.
Retention feeds it too, particularly on Play, where longer-term engagement signals influence how the store treats an app. That takes ASO past the store page into onboarding and early experience, which is a product conversation as much as a marketing one. We flag it when the data shows installs arriving and disappearing, because no amount of listing work fixes that.
- Install rate from listing views tracked as the primary ASO metric
- Keyword rankings tracked per store and per market
- Impressions and product page views separated, so the funnel is visible
- Retention and early engagement watched, since they feed store treatment
- Blended cost per install reported, so organic gains show up in the paid numbers
A clear path, step by step
- 01
Audit and plan
We check the current state, find what is holding you back, and agree a prioritised plan.
- 02
Fix and build
We make the changes: technical fixes, content, structure and internal links.
- 03
Make it citable
We add the structure and signals that help search and AI engines trust and quote the page.
- 04
Track and improve
We measure rankings, visibility and enquiries each month, then refine.
Why choose us for this
We optimise for installs, not just impressions
Creative and keywords handled together, not separately
Plain monthly reporting on rankings and installs
Common questions
What is ASO?
App Store Optimization is improving how your app ranks in app store search and how well the listing converts viewers into installs. Keywords, creatives and ratings all feed it.
How is Google Play different from the App Store?
Google Play indexes your full description; Apple relies on the title, subtitle and a keyword field. Creatives, ratings and update cadence matter on both, so we tune each store separately.
Explore related work
Want this for your business?
Book a free visibility call and I will tell you honestly whether I can help.
How this is delivered
One person leads every project. Where a job genuinely needs a specialist, I bring in people I have worked with before and manage them, so you get one point of contact and one invoice rather than three suppliers blaming each other.
- You talk to the person responsible for the work, not an account manager
- Specialists are briefed and managed by me, and their work is checked before it reaches you
- One contract, one invoice, one place to chase