I think this is precisely what Ed denies. Here are some ways you can gauge your progress:

(i) Are your moves consistent? Do you come up with a plan and follow-through, or do you have to abandon it after the next move?
(ii) Do you play moves that attack or defend groups that are already completely alive? Do you neglect to play moves which attack or defend groups that are nearly dead?
(iii) Are you playing thin formations with tons of cutting points? Who is getting cut to ribbons, you or your opponent?
(iv) Are you playing urgent moves before big moves, and big moves before small moves?
(v) Are you looking for, and finding, multi-purpose moves that answer your opponent's threats but do a little bit of extra work, as well?
(vi) Do you play in a way that shows an understanding of sente, gote, and miai?
(vii) Are you deciding whether to invade or reduce based on an appropriate understanding of the whole-board situation?
(viii) Are you spotting ladders, nets, tesuji, and other techniques that you've been studying?

All of these questions will help you gauge whether your games were good or bad, and over time whether you're improving. Your opponent's rank is, for now, completely meaningless.

I don't know if it's just me, but I always used to get frustrated trying to categorise moves as right or wrong since usually I just ended up deciding that I don't know what's best. Instead I like to focus on exploring the effects of different moves. You should definitely try and evaluate the results, but I don't think there's any need to find that one move that's better than all the others.

I try not to think in terms of right or wrong but better or worse in terms of some quality, e.g. territory, thickness, influence, whatever.

Trying to evaluate positions is definitely worthwhile, but it can be frustrating if that's your goal in reviewing a game. Sometimes I can spend a week studying one specific point in a game and still be unsure which weak group I should strengthen, but I can gain an understanding of how my opponent can take advantage of those weaknesses, and what kind of game is likely to result from each choice. Regardless of what I'm aiming to achieve I'll probably spend my time quite similarly, but what goal I'm emphasising makes all the difference in whether that's a week of curiosity driven exploratory fun, or a slow torturous grind resulting in failure.

Third, during a game form goals and sub-goals. When you review, if you failed to reach any of them, try to find out why. Perhaps a goal or sub-goal was unrealistic. If you met your goals but lost the game, ask yourself what was wrong with those goals.