Hi guys

I'm using this tool (https://aioseo.com/headline-analyzer/) to optimize my titles.

What do you think about it? Are those tips useful or are its tips just machine garbage that i shouldnt use.

For EXAMPLE:

My next video is about a 5 minute short film with mainly drone footage of traveling 1 year through southeast asia showing the different landscapes of thailand, laos, vietnam, cambodia, malaysia and indonesia and the title that i came up with was "The Spirit of Southeast Asia in 365 Days" but it only scored 68 points because it was missing powerful and emotional words.... so i tried to optimize and i came up with "The Spirit of Magical Southeast Asia in 365 Fascinating Days" and got whooping 87 points! Amazing??

I then checked successful videos in that nieche that went viral and they seemed shorter and more precise... so my question is, is it necessary to blow up a title with these powerful words of is it better to keep them shorter, especially in case of this example!?

Thanks guys, keep it up!

The tool link and instruction is in the first comment. Feel free to leave feedback. Thanks.

I've been exploring CreatorML's service and View Predictor, but honestly, the price is out of this world insanely expensive and not even fairly priced for an up-and-coming youtuber, nowhere close and no free tier in any sort.

What do you all think? have you used it? $100/month

As a small channel, the analytics information is not always sufficient to determine the quality/possible engagement of a thumbnail or video title.

What ways/tools are you using to create the best thumbnail+title combination?

Hey YouTubers, I always struggled with getting my videos to rank on YouTube. Writing the perfect title, description, and tags felt like a guessing game.

So, I built Makefy ( https://www.makefy.co )—an AI-powered tool that analyzes your video topic and suggests optimized YouTube titles, descriptions, and tags to boost visibility.

✅ Enter your video topic → get SEO-optimized metadata in seconds
✅ Multilingual support for ranking in different languages
✅ No more keyword guessing—AI finds what works best for your niche

Would this be useful to you? I’d love some feedback! Also, if you want to test it out, let me know.

Hi guys

I'm using this tool (https://aioseo.com/headline-analyzer/) to optimize my titles.

What do you think about it? Are those tips useful or are its tips just machine garbage that i shouldnt use.

For EXAMPLE:

My next video is about a 5 minute short film with mainly drone footage of traveling 1 year through southeast asia showing the different landscapes of thailand, laos, vietnam, cambodia, malaysia and indonesia and the title that i came up with was "The Spirit of Southeast Asia in 365 Days" but it only scored 68 points because it was missing powerful and emotional words.... so i tried to optimize and i came up with "The Spirit of Magical Southeast Asia in 365 Fascinating Days" and got whooping 87 points! Amazing??

I then checked successful videos in that nieche that went viral and they seemed shorter and more precise... so my question is, is it necessary to blow up a title with these powerful words of is it better to keep them shorter, especially in case of this example!?

Thanks guys, keep it up!

You've probably never heard of it but the video talks about ROBLOX and why it sucks now. The point is, which title gets your attention the most? which one will get the most views?

1. ROBLOX: Why It’s a TERRIBLE Game Now! (THE TRUTH)

2. ROBLOX | Why It’s a TERRIBLE Game Now! (THE TRUTH)

3. Why ROBLOX is a TERRIBLE Game Now! *THE TRUTH*

4. Why ROBLOX is a TERRIBLE Game Now! (THE TRUTH)

5. THE TRUTH ABOUT ROBLOX... (MUST WATCH)

6. Why Roblox Is a Terrible Game Now

7. Why Roblox Is a TERRIBLE Game Now...

8. Why Roblox Sucks Now (THE TRUTH)

9. Why Roblox is a TERRIBLE GAME Now... - (The Real Truth About Roblox)

10. Why Roblox Sucks Now... - (The Real Truth About Roblox)

you can reply with the number instead of the whole thing

I was amazed of all the positive input I got for my last title. It ended up being a hit.

Here’s my idea for the next one

(Its solo guitar Music with a closeup screen shot of me playing

How about…

“What to play on guitar when you need calming music”

Or

Want to play calming music? Try this…

TIA

Can you think of anything better?

I’ve been trying to level up my content game lately, especially when it comes to figuring out what kind of videos are working for others in my niche. I feel like I’m spending hours manually checking what my competitors are uploading, which videos are trending, and what kind of formats/thumbnails/titles are performing.

Is there any AI tool or platform that helps automate this kind of YouTube research? Like something that can analyze a channel and give you insights on what's working — not just keywords or tags, but actual content strategy breakdowns.

Would love to hear what others are using or if you've found a workflow that works well. Even non-AI tools are welcome if they save time 😅

Thanks in advance!

I collected 88,823 English YouTube titles (long-form only, Shorts excluded) and compared different title features with their view counts.
The dataset is mostly gaming/entertainment, but the patterns were surprisingly consistent.

1. “I”-based titles perform best

Titles containing “I” (e.g., I tried…, I survived…) had ~1.6× higher median views.
First-person storytelling seems to create the strongest engagement signals.

2. Question titles underperform

Titles containing “?” or starting with How / Why / What show noticeably lower medians (~40–55% of baseline).
In this dataset, viewers responded much better to statements than questions.

3. Optimal length: 5–10 words, ~35–50 characters

Short enough for a clear hook, long enough for context.
Very long titles fall off steadily.

4. Numbers help only when they are at the start

Starting with a number (“5 Things I Learned…”) correlates with higher views.
Numbers buried in the middle show a negative trend.

5. Title structure matters

A simple structure performed best:

Hook – Context

The dash “–” correlates with better performance, while colons “:” correlate with weaker results (likely because they often appear in generic series/episode titles).

6. Moderate use of CAPS works

1–3 emphasized words in ALL CAPS correlate with slightly higher performance.
Full-title shouting wasn’t common enough to draw conclusions.

7. Small language quirks

• “you” = slightly positive

• “your” = slightly negative

• “I” = strongest positive signal by far

TL;DR guide

Based on the data:

• Avoid question titles

• Aim for 5–10 words

• Use a clear hook → “–” → short context

• If using a number, put it at the start

• Use occasional CAPS for emphasis

• First-person titles (“I…”) perform unusually well

If anyone wants the raw counts, most common first words, bigrams, or more breakdowns, I can share them.

I just spent hours "talking" to the ai over at aistudio.google.com

How I went about this:

1. I explained my channel's purpose, my goals, current subscriber count, gave it my channel's stats, gave it individual video stats. Showed it screenshots of my channe's videos section and it was successfully able to identify my style of thumbnails and everything.

2. I let it watch and analyze several of my videos

HERE IS HOW TO DO THIS: The AI has a limit of one video per session, but if you delete the video post you made in your chat, the AI will retain memory of the analyzes of the video but free up a slot for another video.

3. After hearing and watching a few of your videos it will evaluate your style, speech, tone, intentions and so on correctly given you've already provided it with the correct information for your channel and your goals/style of videos and who you are targetting with your videos.

The AI identified a core problem with my channel

My Browser and Search CTR is good, but my entire CTR is dragged down by my extremely low Suggested CTR.

This is the final summary, after long and very very detailed analyzes of many things

"Okay, GP Ollie, I appreciate your request for a brutally honest, numerical rating. This is always subjective, but I'll base it on the data and patterns we've discussed, focusing on your stated goals.

Rating Your Channel's Progress & Future Potential (1-10 Scale):

Individual Aspect Ratings:

1. Content Quality & Authenticity for Niche:

   • Rating: 9/10

   • Reasoning: Your passion, knowledge, in-depth approach, and clear narration are consistently praised by your active audience. You're delivering high value to viewers interested in retro/indie deep dives and your laid-back style. The effort in showcasing many games is evident. This is a huge strength.

2. Branding & Style Consistency:

   • Rating: 8.5/10

   • Reasoning: You have a clearly defined visual style for your thumbnails (panel design) and a consistent laid-back, conversational video style. This builds recognition with your core audience. The slight deduction is only because this consistent style, while great for branding, contributes to the "Suggested Videos" CTR challenge when broader appeal is considered.

3. SEO (Title, Description, Tags - for Search & Topic Clarity):

   • Rating: 8/10

   • Reasoning: Your descriptions are detailed, and you understand the importance of keywords. Your Search CTR (5.9%) and the high AVD from search traffic indicate that when people search for relevant terms, they find your content satisfying. There's always room for refinement, but this is a strong area.

4. Engagement with Core/Active Audience:

   • Rating: 9/10

   • Reasoning: Achieving 400-500 views on niche reviews from an estimated active subscriber base of ~500 is an excellent engagement rate. The positive comments and high AVD from subscribers/notifications further confirm this. Your core audience loves what you do.

5. Performance in Browse Features:

   • Rating: 8.5/10

   • Reasoning: A consistent CTR of 5-7%+ (with peaks like 9.5% for Iron Meat) from Browse is very good. Your thumbnail/title combination is effective in this discovery environment. This is a primary driver of your current views.

6. Performance in Suggested Videos:

   • Rating: 2.5/10

   • Reasoning: This is, as we've discussed, the major bottleneck. A consistent CTR of 0.5% - 1.7% from a large number of impressions in Suggested means a massive missed opportunity for broader reach. While the AVD when clicked is decent, the initial click conversion is very low.

7. Click-Through Rate (CTR) - Overall Channel (On-Platform):

   • Rating: 4/10

   • Reasoning: The current 2.0-3.0% overall CTR is modest. It's heavily dragged down by the low Suggested CTR, despite good Browse/Search CTR. This overall figure is what the algorithm sees at a high level and likely limits the "push" for wider discoverability.

8. Average View Duration (AVD) / Average Percentage Viewed (APV) - Overall Channel:

   • Rating: 6/10

   • Reasoning: An AVD of ~2:47 leading to an APV of ~15-30% (for 10-20 min videos) is okay and fairly typical for the genre/style. The very high AVD from your most engaged segments (Search, Browse clicks, Notifications) is excellent, but the overall average is brought down by less engaged new viewers or those from external sources. There's potential here if more highly engaged viewers can be attracted.

9. Subscriber Growth (Since Current Reboot - Oct 2024):

   • Rating: 7/10

   • Reasoning: Gaining ~480 genuinely interested subscribers in ~7 months in a specific niche with a non-hyper-active upload schedule is solid, healthy organic growth. It proves your current content resonates with new people who find it.

10. Adaptability & Willingness to Analyze (Your Trait as a Creator):

• Rating: 9/10

• Reasoning: Your willingness to dive deep into stats, ask critical questions, and consider different perspectives (even if you ultimately decide to stick with your established methods) is a massive asset for long-term channel development.

Overall Channel Progress Rating (Since Oct 2024 Reboot, for your stated goals):

• Rating: 7/10

• Reasoning: You are successfully building a loyal, engaged core audience that appreciates your specific style and content depth. You're seeing healthy organic subscriber growth from this. Your performance in Browse and Search shows your content has appeal when discoverable through those means. The main factor holding this score back from being higher is the significant underperformance in "Suggested Videos," which limits broader reach (your stated goal of "reaching as many people as I can"). The change in upload frequency also appears to have caused a temporary slowdown that you're navigating.

Future Potential Rating (Assuming current trends & your stated approach):

• If current thumbnail/title strategy for Suggested Videos remains unchanged:

  • Rating: 5.5/10 (for the goal of "reaching as many people as possible")

  • Reasoning: Your channel will likely continue to grow steadily but slowly, primarily through Browse, Search, and word-of-mouth from your dedicated niche. You will reach some new people, but the potential for significantly broader reach will be capped by the low Suggested CTR. It will be a strong, respected niche channel, but not one that breaks out into a much larger audience segment without a change in how it converts "Suggested" impressions.

  • For your personal goal of sharing thoughts with an appreciative community, it will remain highly successful (8-9/10).

• If you find a way to significantly improve Suggested Videos CTR (e.g., through targeted thumbnail/title experimentation on certain videos without alienating your core or sacrificing authenticity):

  • Rating: 7.5 - 8.5/10 (for the goal of "reaching as many people as possible")

  • Reasoning: If you can crack the "Suggested" code, even partially, while maintaining your content quality, your channel has the potential to reach a significantly larger like-minded audience. The strong AVD from those who do click from Suggested indicates the content itself has appeal beyond just Browse users if they can be convinced to click. This would accelerate growth and reach.

Brutal Summary:

You are doing an excellent job creating high-quality, authentic content for a specific, appreciative older gaming audience, and you're building a loyal community. Your SEO for search and your appeal in browse features are solid. The primary, and significant, limiting factor to reaching a much broader audience is the very low click-through rate from "Suggested Videos." Addressing this (if desired for wider reach) is the biggest challenge and opportunity, but it needs to be balanced against maintaining your brand integrity and the strong performance you already have with your core audience and in browse features. The recent change in upload frequency is a temporary headwind.

This is my honest assessment based on the data. Your passion and dedication are clear, and those are invaluable assets on YouTube."

------------------------

The LLM(AI) was able to correctly comprehend my channel's activity and subscriber history and the fact that even tho I have a total of 1679 subs, only about 500 of those are active since I gained many of my subs 2008 and then 2016-2018 and we're focusing on everything I've been doing since October 2024 since I returned to youtube, I gained some 480 or so subs since then.

=============

Since my channel has this consistent problem with Browser Features having good CTR but suggested being awful, I asked if that's normal, here's what it said. It also referenced an earlier thumbnail it suggested that I made, showed it but I was reluctant to change to. This part of the conversation was hours ago but it remembered it and used it here.

"Is it common across YouTube for Browse and Suggested CTR to be this different?

Yes, it is quite common to see a significant difference between Browse CTR and Suggested CTR, though the magnitude of your difference (9.8% vs. 0.3%) is particularly stark and indicative of a very specific challenge.

Why This Happens (General YouTube Dynamics):

1. Different Viewer Mindsets & Contexts:

   • Browse: Viewers are often in a more passive discovery mode, open to a wider range of content that catches their eye. Your strong branding and intriguing text hooks ("MEAT GUNS GORE") work well here.

   • Suggested: Viewers have just finished a video. Their immediate interest is often narrower and more directly related to what they just watched. The competition is also more direct, as they see your thumbnail alongside several others that the algorithm thinks are relevant. Your thumbnail needs to win that immediate "next click" against direct alternatives.

2. Algorithmic Seeding & "Testing the Waters":

   • Browse: The algorithm has a good idea of your core audience's interests (retro, indie, run-and-gun) and shows your video to them on their homepages, leading to high engagement.

   • Suggested: The algorithm is "trying out" your video next to a wider array of content. Initially, it might cast a wide net. If it suggests your niche Iron Meat review next to a very mainstream AAA shooter review, or a completely unrelated gaming topic, the 0.3% CTR isn't surprising. The audience for that previous video may have no interest in Iron Meat, regardless of how good your thumbnail is for its own niche.

3. Thumbnail Competitiveness in Different Arenas:

   • A thumbnail that is clear and informative within your branded panel (great for Browse) might look less dynamic or "clickable" when shrunk down and placed next to -for example- a thumbnail with a huge, expressive face, bright contrasting colors, and a single, giant, provocative word, which are common tactics for high Suggested CTR.

What the Current Iron Meat Stats are Screaming:

• Your "MEAT GUNS GORE AND MORE" thumbnail + FOMO title is a HOME RUN for your Browse audience. A 9.8% CTR with a 5:33 AVD is phenomenal. The algorithm is correctly identifying people who will love this when they see it on their homepage.

• For Suggested, it's a MISFIRE in its current iteration when shown broadly.

  • The massive increase in impressions for Suggested (from 332 to 880) while the CTR dropped to 0.3% means YouTube did try to push it out more in Suggested, but those broader audiences did not click.

  • The AVD from Suggested (2:25) is lower than from Browse. This is expected with a lower CTR, as more "wrong audience" clicks might happen, leading to quicker drop-offs. However, it's not disastrously low, meaning the few who click from suggested still find some value.

  • The "Realtime" data showing Suggested as the top source (57.1% in the last hour) means YouTube is currently trying to push it heavily via Suggested, but the very low CTR indicates this push isn't converting well.

"I'm afraid if I update the thumbnail it might be too busy 'at a glance' and ruin my browser features? Maybe I should leave it as is. I have this exact same situation with ALL my videos and choose to leave the thumbs be in favor of browser features."

• This is the crux of your dilemma, and your caution is 100% justified. You have a system that generates excellent Browse performance. Risking that for a potential (and historically difficult for you) gain in Suggested is a big gamble.

• If this pattern (high Browse CTR, very low Suggested CTR) is consistent across ALL your videos, it strongly suggests that your current overall thumbnail/title strategy is highly optimized for one discovery path but not the other.

• Leaving it as is for THIS video is a safe bet to protect your excellent Browse numbers.

Long-Term Strategic Thoughts (Not just for Iron Meat):

If this pattern is indeed universal for your channel:

1. You might be a "Browse-first" channel. This is perfectly fine! You can build a very successful and sustainable channel primarily through strong Browse and Search performance, especially with a dedicated niche. Growth will be more steady than explosive.

2. The "Cost" of Your Branding Style for Suggested: Your consistent panel style, while great for branding and Browse, might be inherently less suited to the rapid-fire, high-impact visual competition in Suggested. This is a trade-off you seem to be consciously (and successfully, for Browse) making.

3. Tiny Experiments for Suggested (Low Risk): If you ever want to try to nudge Suggested CTR on a future video:

   • Could the game art on the right side of your panel be even more dynamic or zoomed in on an ultra-compelling detail?

   • Could the text hook on the panel be made even shorter and punchier for some videos?

   • The "BETTER THAN CONTRA!?" idea added to the art side was an attempt to bridge this. If that specific execution feels too busy, perhaps a different provocative text hook, very cleanly integrated over the game art on the right, could be tested on a new video.

For Iron Meat now:
Let it ride. The 9.8% Browse CTR is something to protect. The algorithm has clearly identified a segment of the Browse audience that loves this package. It's now "testing" it hard in Suggested and finding that this specific package isn't converting that broader, less targeted audience. This is normal, especially for niche content.

You are right to be protective of what's clearly working very well for a significant portion of your views. The extreme difference in CTR between Browse and Suggested is indeed large, but it's a logical outcome when a specific style excels in one context but struggles in another, more competitive and differently-minded one."

---------

EDIT: The algorithm FINALLY realized focusing on Suggested isn't working, so now it started recommending Browser Features again for the Iron Meat video and overall CTR grew as well as views, I got 140 views in no time at all since the damn thing started recommending the video in browser features again over Suggested where it was dying.

Due to the long Suggested focus the video will not get far, but it might hit 400 views at least at this rate which is fine-ish for a single indie game review IMO. Retention is still good at 16% at the end, that might drop a bit tho as views increase especially if external increases but we'll see.

I edited out the first 7 seconds as suggested in the other topic I made on this video in this sub, so we'll see if that increases starting retention or not.

Bottom line is, youtube decided to focus on Suggested and ruined the video's chances at views when it was doing well in Browser Features but it's back to recommending it more in Browser now and it immediately took off.