If Fetch As Google can render website, it should be appear on SERP ?
-
Hello everyone and thank you in advance for helping me.
I have a Reactjs application which has been made by Create-React-App that is zero configuration. Also I connect it using Axios to the API using Codeigniter(PHP).
Before using Reactjs, this website was at the top Google's SERPs for specific keywords. After Using Reactjs and some changes in URLs with no redirection in htaccess or something else, I lost my search engine visibility! I guess it should be caused by Google penalties!
I tried using "react-snap", "react-snapshot" and so forth for prerendering but there are so many problem with them. Also I tried using Prerender.io and unfortunately my host provider didn't help me to config the shared host!
Finally I found a great article that my website eventually display in Rendering box of Fetch As Google. But still in Fetching box, the dynamic content didn't display. But I can see my entire website in both "This is how Googlebot saw the page" and "This is how a visitor to your website would have seen the page" for all pages without any problem.
If Fetch As Google can render the entire of the website, is it possible to index my pages after a while and it would be appear on Google's SERP?
-
Absolutely not a problem. I do think that SSR would be a really positive way forwards for your website! Hopefully that will begin to get the trend-line going up again instead of down
-
Thank you Effectdigital for this response and for your spending time to me. I read twice to get understand and it was fully explained all things in details. I'm gonna searching more about some of your keywords that you mentioned above. I have planed to run SSR in a few months later and finished this problem as well.
-
From the sounds of it, it's not a penalty - it's just a botched migration (with no redirects) to a new platform which is less search-accessible than the previous platform.
Fetch and render has many pitfalls. It (WRONGLY) makes webmaster's think that, every crawl Google does - will be to that level of depth. What you get with fetch and render is a best-case scenario, where Google are deploying all their crawling and rendering technologies for you including rendered browsing (to capture generated content)
You have your base (un-modified) source code, and then you have your modified source code. To get at that (which is far richer, especially for sites which are mostly generated) you have to run a crawler which uses a headless browser (something like Selenium or Windmill, through something like Python) in order to fire the scripts and harvest the modified source data. These days that doesn't take extreme amounts of time, but it does take extreme amounts of time when you compare it to base-source scraping (on average 10x longer). It may still seem like seconds to you, but believe me it takes much more time than near-instant source-code scraping
Google's mission is to index the web. Do you really think they're going to take a random 10x efficiency hit because, modern devs have decided that more modified content is faster and better?
Well... they will and they won't. Google have confirmed that they can and do crawl in this way. But results from moves just like yours, are constantly showing us that they don't deploy this tech for everyone - and even when they do, they don't use it all the time for every crawl (scrape)
If you're in control of a huge site that Google can't afford to lose from their index (like compare the market, Barclays, coca-cola etc) then you have a lot more room to play in this area and reap the benefits of a lightning fast CMS (and front-end deployment, obviously better UX)
If you're not in that position, don't be surprised when these things happen. You have to have some perspective on yourself and what your site is worth to the web. To you it's everything, to Google it's one grain of sand on a vast ocean-floor. And it's one grain of sand which is making Google's life harder, by hitting the efficiency of their core MO (mission objective)
There may be some stuff you can do to fix this, or it may be time to swallow a bitter pill and do a roll-back.
Looking at your source code:
^ the above link will only work in Google Chrome!
It is obvious that it's extremely bare
Let's download the 'base' source code to a PHP file:
It's actually just 3 lines of code, but it probably takes up the space of ... well, a lot more than that (hundred lines maybe)
But here's your modified source code:
It's WAY BIGGER, it's 49 lines of code and even then it's highly condensed
My assertion to you, is that not enough of your coding and content resides within the 'base' source code, most of it is in the modified source code
It's a tough lesson to learn. Yeah, Google 'can' do many things. Yeah their analysis tools put their best foot forwards and show you what they 'can' do. But 'can' and 'will'... they're different cookies man
if you have a powerful enough server (even if you don't maybe it's time to get one!) - maybe you could have all the scripts fire server-side and then just fire users (and search engines) the pre-rendered base-source. Or do something clever like that. This is not game-over, but you'll need to get really smart now. I wouldn't recommend bothering to do that without retrospectively going back (FAST) and doing a full, URL-to-URL 301 redirect migration project (using .htaccess or web.config)
The faster you act, the more likely your recover
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
How Can I Displace a Quora Q&A in a Google Featured Snippet?
Hello all. I'm looking for ideas for displacing a Quora Q&A as the featured snippet in google search results. I rank organically for the target term (it's a branded term, "urban airship pricing") in results 1, 2, 3 and 4. The Quora Q&A ranks 5, but is still getting the featured snippet. The Quora question, which is from 2013, is negative - essentially "why does Urban Airship cost so much." It was posed / someone answered the question before we restructured pricing, and added a free starter edition, so the information in the answer is incorrect. It's causing issues for our sales teams, there's a fair amount of volume around this term for us, and worst of all, it's making me mad 😉 I've considered the tactics listed below, but would love to know if anyone's done this, and what free or low-lost tactics work/where to focus efforts. Thanks in advance for help! -Jessica Tactics I'm Considering (Are some or all worth doing? Better ideas?) Create a pricing FAQ page on my website to try give Google a short answer to a query related to pricing that it might feature instead of the Quora Q&A Get a lot of folks to downvote the Quora question (and upvote the short answer we added). Although I'm worried that "activity" on the question might actually make things worse not better in terms of its visibility. Buy paid Google Adwords for the term so the featured snippet isn't quite so starkly featured (we were buying for this term, looking into why our ads aren't showing up at the moment) Talk about pricing on sites like Product Hunt or others (other ideas?) to see if they'll rank highly enough to add more/better content to page 1 results. Contact Quora and let them know that this outdated question is being pulled into a featured snippet and see if they'll do something about it (remove it, etc.) Provide feedback to Google (using the link under the snippet) that "something is wrong" or "this isn't useful"
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | jpoundstone0 -
Google WMT/search console: Thousands of "Links to your site" even only one back-link from a website.
Hi, I can see in my search console that a website giving thousands of links to my site where hardly only one back-link from one of their page to our page. Why this is happening? Here is screenshot: http://imgur.com/a/VleUf
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | vtmoz0 -
Fetch as Google -- Does not result in pages getting indexed
I run a exotic pet website which currently has several types of species of reptiles. It has done well in SERP for the first couple of types of reptiles, but I am continuing to add new species and for each of these comes the task of getting ranked and I need to figure out the best process. We just released our 4th species, "reticulated pythons", about 2 weeks ago, and I made these pages public and in Webmaster tools did a "Fetch as Google" and index page and child pages for this page: http://www.morphmarket.com/c/reptiles/pythons/reticulated-pythons/index While Google immediately indexed the index page, it did not really index the couple of dozen pages linked from this page despite me checking the option to crawl child pages. I know this by two ways: first, in Google Webmaster Tools, if I look at Search Analytics and Pages filtered by "retic", there are only 2 listed. This at least tells me it's not showing these pages to users. More directly though, if I look at Google search for "site:morphmarket.com/c/reptiles/pythons/reticulated-pythons" there are only 7 pages indexed. More details -- I've tested at least one of these URLs with the robot checker and they are not blocked. The canonical values look right. I have not monkeyed really with Crawl URL Parameters. I do NOT have these pages listed in my sitemap, but in my experience Google didn't care a lot about that -- I previously had about 100 pages there and google didn't index some of them for more than 1 year. Google has indexed "105k" pages from my site so it is very happy to do so, apparently just not the ones I want (this large value is due to permutations of search parameters, something I think I've since improved with canonical, robots, etc). I may have some nofollow links to the same URLs but NOT on this page, so assuming nofollow has only local effects, this shouldn't matter. Any advice on what could be going wrong here. I really want Google to index the top couple of links on this page (home, index, stores, calculator) as well as the couple dozen gene/tag links below.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | jplehmann0 -
Website (.BE) showing up in .NL SERPS
Fellow mozzers, we need your help We have a situation where a customer has two websites for each country: flowtracksurf.be → Belgium flowtracksurf.nl → Netherlands They used to have very good keyword rankings in the SERPS in BE & NL. Flowtracksurf.nl had good rankings in Google.nl and Flowtracksurf.be in Google.be.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Jacobe
Recently there has been a change: Flowtracksurf.nl is not showing up in Google.nl anymore. It also seems that all the rankings from flowtracksurf.nl have been switched to flowtracksurf.be. .BE is doing very well, .NL is suffering. Data shows us that .NL : In the first two weeks of december 2014, we see a massive drop in traffic (GA) In that same week(s) we see a drop in search queries (Webmaster Tools) We see the exact opposite in .BE (growing strong in those weeks) When we look at the cache of flowtracksurf.nl we see only reference to flowtracksurf.be. Is that a hint of what was going on? On the same date that we see a massive drop in traffic on .NL, we see a peak in 'indexation' of .BE We see that the MOZ pages crawled dropped in that same week for NL We're also seeing that all the traffic from Google.nl is now going to flowtracksurf.be. Some keywords we were scoring #1-2 for are: surfvakanties, surfvakantie, surfcamp mimizan, surfcamp, frankrijk, surfcamp spanje, surfen frankrijk We just can't figure out the hard evidence in the data.
Can you help us on that?0 -
My website is not ranking for primary keywords in Google
I need help regarding some SEO strategy that need to be implemented to my website http://goo.gl/AiOgu1 . My website is a leading live chat product, daily it receives around 2000 unique visitors. Initially the website was impacted by manual link penalty, I cleaned up lot of backlinks, the website revoked from the penalty some where around June'14. Most of the secondary and longtail Keywords started ranking in Google, but unfortunately, it do not rank well for the primary keywords like (live chat, live chat software, helpdesk etc). Since I have done lot of onsite changes and even revamped the content but till now I dont find any improvement. I am unable to understand where I have got structed.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | sandeep.clickdesk
can anyone help me out?0 -
Buying a Google News website, against Google Terms?
We are looking at buying a business that has a number of websites Is it against buying a business that has a Google News website and continue to use the site? Once the business is sold, would google remove the site from its News?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | JohnPeters0 -
Can Google read my backlink in Javascript??
Hi SeoMoz community! I have a software product, which our clients implement onto their websites. It is like a pop up box. I know that backlinks are very important for SEO ranking, and I really want to give our clients 2 options of product: 1. you can get the free/cheaper option if you use the code which has a keyworded backlink to our site on it 2. you can pay small fee if you don't want to use the version with a link to our site on it Now, the problem is that the product is written entirely in Javascript, and I don't think that Google crawls this, do they? Is there a way around this? Thanks for your help!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | qdigi0 -
Google isn't displaying the www. for my site in the SERPS
I noticed that every other site url in the serps for my main keywords has a www. on their display url except mine. I have the site set to display the www. Can this potentially hurt my SEO and what can I do to fix this? Thanks Aaron. www.png
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | afranklin0