Urban Belonging
ASO Keyword Dashboard
Tracking 101 keywords for Urban Belonging in Apple App Store
Urban Belonging tracks 101 keywords (3 keywords rank; 98 need traction). Key metrics: 33% top-10 coverage, opportunity 70.3, difficulty 40.3, best rank 4.
Tracked keywords
101
3 ranked • 98 not ranking yet
Top 10 coverage
33%
Best rank 4 • Latest leader —
Avg opportunity
70.3
Top keyword: university
Avg difficulty
40.3
Lower scores indicate easier wins
Opportunity leaders
- 64.0
university
Opportunity: 73.0 • Difficulty: 39.8 • Rank —
Competitors: 29
- 68.6
series
Opportunity: 73.0 • Difficulty: 43.8 • Rank —
Competitors: 255
- 67.5
upon
Opportunity: 73.0 • Difficulty: 41.4 • Rank —
Competitors: 169
- 67.7
project
Opportunity: 73.0 • Difficulty: 42.1 • Rank —
Competitors: 94
- 63.6
idea
Opportunity: 73.0 • Difficulty: 39.2 • Rank —
Competitors: 69
Unranked opportunities
university
Opportunity: 73.0 • Difficulty: 39.8 • Competitors: 29
series
Opportunity: 73.0 • Difficulty: 43.8 • Competitors: 255
upon
Opportunity: 73.0 • Difficulty: 41.4 • Competitors: 169
project
Opportunity: 73.0 • Difficulty: 42.1 • Competitors: 94
idea
Opportunity: 73.0 • Difficulty: 39.2 • Competitors: 69
High competition keywords
designed
Total apps: 114,471 • Major competitors: 1,080
Latest rank: — • Difficulty: 51.8
information
Total apps: 112,143 • Major competitors: 1,128
Latest rank: — • Difficulty: 52.4
take
Total apps: 95,526 • Major competitors: 1,742
Latest rank: — • Difficulty: 52.6
different
Total apps: 95,103 • Major competitors: 1,687
Latest rank: — • Difficulty: 52.5
data
Total apps: 86,751 • Major competitors: 1,000
Latest rank: — • Difficulty: 51.5
All tracked keywords
Includes opportunity, difficulty, rankings and competitor benchmarks
| Major Competitors | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| belonging | 69 | 100 | 27 | 45 473 competing apps Median installs: 300 Avg rating: 4.3 | 4 | 4 | 3 major competitor apps |
| belongs | 70 | 100 | 32 | 51 1,082 competing apps Median installs: 450 Avg rating: 4.2 | 14 | 14 | 13 major competitor apps |
| belong | 70 | 100 | 32 | 52 1,364 competing apps Median installs: 500 Avg rating: 4.0 | 74 | 74 | 13 major competitor apps |
| collaboration | 72 | 100 | 44 | 63 5,590 competing apps Median installs: 300 Avg rating: 4.1 | — | — | 60 major competitor apps |
| focus | 70 | 100 | 47 | 75 31,005 competing apps Median installs: 450 Avg rating: 4.3 | — | — | 369 major competitor apps |
| users | 68 | 100 | 50 | 80 60,732 competing apps Median installs: 350 Avg rating: 4.0 | — | — | 667 major competitor apps |
| digital | 69 | 100 | 49 | 78 46,511 competing apps Median installs: 450 Avg rating: 4.1 | — | — | 703 major competitor apps |
| information | 66 | 100 | 52 | 84 112,143 competing apps Median installs: 350 Avg rating: 4.1 | — | — | 1,128 major competitor apps |
| used | 69 | 100 | 49 | 79 50,682 competing apps Median installs: 400 Avg rating: 4.0 | — | — | 502 major competitor apps |
| designed | 66 | 100 | 52 | 85 114,471 competing apps Median installs: 350 Avg rating: 4.2 | — | — | 1,080 major competitor apps |
| content | 68 | 100 | 52 | 79 55,812 competing apps Median installs: 550 Avg rating: 4.2 | — | — | 944 major competitor apps |
| file | 72 | 100 | 45 | 70 14,696 competing apps Median installs: 550 Avg rating: 4.0 | — | — | 191 major competitor apps |
| people | 68 | 100 | 52 | 79 52,098 competing apps Median installs: 500 Avg rating: 4.2 | — | — | 907 major competitor apps |
| built | 70 | 100 | 46 | 74 27,167 competing apps Median installs: 450 Avg rating: 4.3 | — | — | 256 major competitor apps |
| api | 71 | 100 | 34 | 57 2,400 competing apps Median installs: 300 Avg rating: 4.1 | — | — | 13 major competitor apps |
| key | 69 | 100 | 48 | 78 46,710 competing apps Median installs: 450 Avg rating: 4.2 | — | — | 535 major competitor apps |
| university | 73 | 100 | 40 | 64 6,678 competing apps Median installs: 350 Avg rating: 4.0 | — | — | 29 major competitor apps |
| photos | 69 | 100 | 49 | 77 38,113 competing apps Median installs: 650 Avg rating: 4.1 | — | — | 633 major competitor apps |
| picture | 71 | 100 | 46 | 72 19,636 competing apps Median installs: 650 Avg rating: 4.1 | — | — | 312 major competitor apps |
| take | 67 | 100 | 53 | 83 95,526 competing apps Median installs: 500 Avg rating: 4.1 | — | — | 1,742 major competitor apps |
| group | 71 | 100 | 51 | 73 23,469 competing apps Median installs: 400 Avg rating: 4.2 | — | — | 304 major competitor apps |
| code | 71 | 100 | 45 | 72 20,814 competing apps Median installs: 400 Avg rating: 4.0 | — | — | 239 major competitor apps |
| interface | 69 | 100 | 47 | 77 39,818 competing apps Median installs: 400 Avg rating: 4.1 | — | — | 327 major competitor apps |
| around | 69 | 100 | 52 | 79 49,795 competing apps Median installs: 600 Avg rating: 4.1 | — | — | 1,033 major competitor apps |
| series | 73 | 100 | 44 | 69 12,613 competing apps Median installs: 650 Avg rating: 4.0 | — | — | 255 major competitor apps |
App Description
The app is published together with a set of scripts that turns its output into data visualizations in the form of e.g. network graphs and geographical maps. The methodological idea is that these visualizations can be used as elicitation devices in qualitative focus groups around the pictures taken. The patterns in these visualizations can also be used to select who to put together in such a focus group setting. An example could be to bring people together that have very different interpretations of an area or a series of photos to discuss this. Or to group people that use the same annotations. The possibilities are many.
The UB app was developed as part of the project ‘Urban Belonging’ that studied how members of different organizations in Copenhagen (e.g. minorities, handicapped and LGBTQ+) felt a sense of belonging to the city. The project was a collaboration between researchers from Aalborg University, GEHL architects, IT University of Copenhagen and Amsterdam University of Applied Sciences. The project is built upon the app 'Snappthis' by Marije ten Brink and its redevelopment was funded by Ander Koed Madsen's project 'Doing Data Together', developed by Iain Kettles and designed by Marcos Cisneros. The code and the Figma file behind the app is open source. The app is handled through an API that you can get a key for by contacting akma@hum.aau.dk. More information about the urban belonging team, the thoughts behind the app and its possible research applications can be found at https://urbanbelonging.com