Comparisons
Full window (includes a partial month) versus Q4 2025. An increase is not automatically good. When engagement falls while sessions rise, my assumption is paid.
Swap windows
Reset filters-85.6%
Sessions change
21,539 → 3,095
-2.0 pt
Engagement change
50.6% → 48.6%
-90.4%
Paid mix-column change
8,250 → 795
Columns
| Sessions | 21,539 | 3,095 | -18,444 | -85.6% | Less volume. I would check whether quality improved. |
| Users (monthly sum) | 18,703 | 2,666 | -16,037 | -85.7% | A sum of monthly rows, not unique people across the window. |
| Engagement rate | 50.6% | 48.6% | -2.0 pt | -3.9% | Quality worsened even if volume rose. |
| Direct sessions | 8,013 | 1,504 | -6,509 | -81.2% | This is the floor of the engine. |
| Paid sessions (mix column) | 8,250 | 795 | -7,455 | -90.4% | Paid receded; I would look at Organic Search time. |
| Organic Search column | 2,460 | 342 | -2,118 | -86.1% | This is the highest-quality scalable channel I can see in the full window. |
| Key events | 13,250 | 1,433 | -11,817 | -89.2% | This total mixes hiring and generic actions. I would not treat a rise as leads. |
What I noticed. Sessions moved -85.6% while engagement moved -2.0 points. Paid mix-column moved -90.4%.
How I am reading it. Volume and quality can disagree. I would read the mix columns before calling this growth or decline.
Where I would go next
| What I noticed | The numbers | How I am reading it | What I would do next |
|---|---|---|---|
| Direction needs a quality test | -85.6% sessions, -2.0 pt engagement. | Volume and quality can disagree, so I would not call this growth from sessions alone. | I would carry both numbers into any budget conversation. |