Comparisons
Q1 2026 versus Full window (includes a partial month). An increase is not automatically good. When engagement falls while sessions rise, my assumption is paid.
Swap windows
Reset filters+125.4%
Sessions change
9,555 → 21,539
-1.8 pt
Engagement change
52.4% → 50.6%
+90.0%
Paid mix-column change
4,343 → 8,250
Columns
| Sessions | 9,555 | 21,539 | 11,984 | +125.4% | More volume. I would check whether paid caused it. |
| Users (monthly sum) | 8,506 | 18,703 | 10,197 | +119.9% | A sum of monthly rows, not unique people across the window. |
| Engagement rate | 52.4% | 50.6% | -1.8 pt | -3.4% | Quality worsened even if volume rose. |
| Direct sessions | 3,366 | 8,013 | 4,647 | +138.1% | This is the floor of the engine. |
| Paid sessions (mix column) | 4,343 | 8,250 | 3,907 | +90.0% | Likely the spike mechanism. |
| Organic Search column | 733 | 2,460 | 1,727 | +235.6% | This is the highest-quality scalable channel I can see in the full window. |
| Key events | 4,303 | 13,250 | 8,947 | +207.9% | This total mixes hiring and generic actions. I would not treat a rise as leads. |
What I noticed. Sessions moved +125.4% while engagement moved -1.8 points. Paid mix-column moved +90.0%.
How I am reading it. The later window bought more traffic of worse quality. That looks like the Paid Social pattern.
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 | +125.4% sessions, -1.8 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. |