Rank trackers are good at one thing: producing a screenshot that looks convincing in a client report. They are less good at telling you whether the work is actually paying off. A single keyword position hides everything that matters: search volume, intent, and how many other queries the page is now competing for.
What a rankings screenshot hides
A page can hold position one for a keyword with twelve monthly searches while losing ground on the fifty related queries that actually drive the business. Average position across a query cluster, pulled straight from Search Console and not a third-party tracker, tells you whether the whole topic is moving, not just the one term someone picked to report on.
On a bilingual property portal I worked on, average position moved from 40.0 to 8.7 over six months. No single keyword tells that story. The aggregate does.
What to track instead
Three numbers, read together: impressions (is the page being shown for more queries), average position (is it moving up across that set), and clicks (is the movement converting into traffic). If impressions grow but clicks lag, the page is being found but not chosen. That is a title and meta description problem, not a rankings problem.
Screenshots are fine for a report. They are a bad tool for deciding what to fix next.