How long does Google retain search query logs compared to DuckDuckGo?

1. The core difference: business models explain retention practices

Google’s search business depends on collecting and analyzing user data to personalize search results and target ads; reporting notes Google “collects and stores data to further improve its engine” and tailors results to users based on that stored behavior ^[1]. DuckDuckGo’s stated business model is the opposite: it emphasizes not tracking users, not storing personal data or search histories, and serving keyword-based ads instead of behaviorally targeted ads ^{[1] [3]}.

2. What DuckDuckGo says it actually does with your queries

Multiple reviews and explainers repeat DuckDuckGo’s public claim that it does not store personally identifiable search histories and “forgets your search query as soon as it runs,” with the company positioning itself as an “antidote to big tech data collection” ^{[2] [4]}. Coverage also highlights that DuckDuckGo blocks third‑party trackers and does not build individualized profiles for ad targeting ^{[4] [5]}.

3. What reporting says Google keeps and why

Analyses describe Google as logging keywords and user behavior to feed personalization and advertising systems — “Google logs the keywords you search for” and uses collected data to tailor ads and services ^{[2] [1]}. That storage and cross‑service integration is presented as the reason Google can deliver highly personalized search results and integrated features across Maps, Gmail, YouTube and more ^{[1] [6]}.

4. Explicit retention durations: available sources do not specify precise times

The set of provided sources repeatedly state the difference in approach (DuckDuckGo claims not to store personal searches; Google stores and analyzes them) but do not give concrete retention-period numbers (days, months, years) for either company’s logs. Therefore, precise retention durations are not found in current reporting supplied here (not found in current reporting).

5. How privacy features and controls complicate the picture

Several pieces note Google offers user controls (Incognito mode, search history settings) and has made moves toward greater transparency and security; reporting frames this as Google trying to “hold on to its users” even while tracking continues ^{[7] [8]}. DuckDuckGo’s model removes many of those control tradeoffs by design — fewer controls are needed because less is collected in the first place ^{[4] [9]}.

6. Tradeoffs users face: personalization vs. privacy

Commentary stresses a tradeoff: Google provides personalized, often more contextually relevant results because it retains and analyzes search data, which some users value; DuckDuckGo provides a more private, non‑personalized experience and relies on keyword‑based ads instead of profile-driven targeting ^{[1] [3]}. Reviewers present both as valid choices depending on whether convenience and personalization or maximum privacy is the priority ^{[10] [6]}.

7. Claims and potential agendas to watch for in this reporting

Many sources repeat DuckDuckGo’s own framing (“does not track” / “forgets queries”), which reflects the company’s business and marketing position; readers should note those are company claims echoed by reviews ^{[2] [5]}. Conversely, descriptions of Google as “data-hungry” come from critiques of its ad‑driven model and may emphasize privacy concerns over benefits like integrated services ^{[9] [8]}.

8. Practical takeaway and next steps for readers who want specifics

If you need exact retention windows (e.g., how long raw query logs are stored by Google or DuckDuckGo), the provided articles don’t publish those numbers; you should consult each company’s official privacy policy or support pages for authoritative retention timelines and definitions of “personal data” versus anonymized logs (not found in current reporting). For a privacy-first default switch, reviews give DuckDuckGo high marks for not building user profiles; for integrated features and personalization, reporting shows Google’s stored data enables those capabilities ^{[2] [1]}.