Ranking via partial match
-
If I wanted to rank for "red hot widgets" and my domain was redhot.com, would it be better to obtain backlinks (via "red hot widgets" anchor text) pointing to:
A) redhot.com (homepage)
or
Many thanks.
-
I can't find the perfect quote right now, but I have often read articles were Eric Enge, Matt Cutts and others with a high degree of credibility talked about how unnatural anchor text patterns will likely lead to a (algorithmic) penalty.
Some example articles:
http://www.stonetemple.com/articles/anchor-text.shtml
http://www.stonetemple.com/articles/interview-matt-cutts-061608.shtml
The premise is anchor links are supposed to be independent, and such links will vary naturally if not unduly influenced. When the identical anchor text is used past a certain threshhold, it is clear some extra influence is at work and the links will not have the same value. That influence can include such factors as a widget with specific code, links submitted to 100s of directories, republished articles, standard software created by links, etc.
A natural, independent link has more value then any form of influenced link, and Google does what it can to differentiate them and weight them accordingly.
-
Interesting about redhot.com/red-hot-widgets vs.redhot.com/widgets. So the latter will not be considered a closer match and no problem repeating the KWs red & hot?
Robert, regarding assumption 2, if I was trying to rank for hot dog onions and the domain was hotdog.com would the same still apply?
ie. Is hotdogs.com/hot-dog-onions better than hotdogs.com/onions -- hot dogs & hot dog onions being 2 different products?
-
Thanks for the advice guys.
-
Ryan,
the natural anchor text varies or naturally varying anchor text: Other than appearing unnatural or having readability issues, is there any evidence you have seen as to this having an effect on ranking, etc.? Just curious on this.
-
Based on your question being what you prefer to rank for KW: "red hot widgets" I would say a variant of B would be best. Assumption 1: Redhot is a descriptor of multiple items - widgets, gidgets, and midgets.
Assumption 2: Redhot.com was not a single product or service offering.
The variant I would use is redhot.com/red-hot-widgets; the reason being that I would have the partial KW in the domain and you would have an exact-match KW in the URL.
In a highly competitive widget market, you could go with widgets.redhot.com and grow the subdomain but you will need links, good anchor text and time. You would be growing widgets as its own domain, links, etc.
With a smaller site and the above assumptions, I would go with redhot.com/red-hot-widgets.com.
-
Ideally each page of your site should target one keyword or phrase. Presumably your home page will focus your brand name "Red Hot". Your redhot.com/widgets page will focus "red hot widgets". If this description is accurate for your site, then the backlinks for "red hot widgets" would best applied to your /widgets page.
Keep in mind, natural anchor text varies. It would not be a good idea to have all your links use the same anchor text as it would appear quite unnatural.
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
-
Drop in Rankings
Hello Webmasters, My site has incurred a sudden dip in rankings across sections. We conducted an analysis and have observed the following two major issues: Unnatural Links Penalty: Our site was issued an Unnatural Links Penalty on May 23. Basically, we have both 'http' and 'https' versions of our website registered on Webmaster tools. Initially, the warning showed up on the 'http' version and thus we started a cleanup by extracting the linking domains and have also filed a reconsideration request once all the spammy domains were removed and rightly disavowed. Recently, we got another manual action warning on the 'https' version regarding the unnatural links. So we have started with the cleanup activity right away. While analyzing this issue, we came across another major problem regarding the two versions which is our next concern and is mentioned below. https Canonical Issue: For more insights, we went through our site’s content and found that our website is following the below pattern Our 'http' version of the webpages get 301 redirected to the 'https' version. This 'https' version again has a canonical pointing to the 'http' version thus creating a loop. To conclude, I request your valuable learnings and thoughts on the following: Which of these issues are likely to have affected our website’s ranking Which version is likely to be preferred by Google (https or http) in our case
Technical SEO | | Starcom_Search0 -
Domain not ranking in Google
https://www.buitenspeelgoed.nl/ is a domain acquired by our client. Previously this website was on http://www.buitenspeelgoed-keupink.nl. With the old domain they were ranking top 30 on 'buitenspeelgoed' in google.nl. Now with the new exact match domain they aren't ranking any more (for months). However, the website is indexed, as you can see on http://1l1.be/nz I don't know what to do anymore. Need some advise. What we allready have done the last months: made adjustments to the 301-redirects (this was originaly setup wrong by the webdesigner (de) optimized the homepage on 'buitenspeelgoed' (strange is the fact that the Moz robot can't access the site). Checked the robots.txt to see if the website was blocked for Google Checked the meta robots to see if the website was blocked for Google Disavowed some spammy (old) links which linked to the old domain Checked Search console > Fetch as Google if there isn't any Malware of some kind (and to see if Google can access the site) Checked Search consol to see if there manual spam actions (isn't the case) Checked for duplicate content by copy/paste some texts in Google and see if any other results are showing up (isn't the case for most of the texts) Please let me know what we can do.
Technical SEO | | InventusOnline0 -
Not ranking - Scarped content
Hi, I have a problem with a website, that never compe up with before. The website is: https://www.enallaktikidrasi.com It has a bunch of excellent articles, good enough on-page SEO and a medium backlink profile. However, it is ranking just for very very few keywords. The major problem is that there are original articles that searched by their title won't appear in top100 results but they will appear in other websites that scapre them (even if they give a backlink to our original article!) Also, the website has good rankings in Bing and Yahoo but not in Google. There are keywords ranking in #1 in Bing but nowhere in top10 pages in Google.... I am guessing for 3 issues: 1. Majestic shows a very low trust score (just 13). However, the website has not got any kind of penalty in the last 3 years. 2. There are many scarpers. The odd is that scarpers with no real value outrank our content. (Scarpers with almost zero backlink profile) 3. We ran Sucuri on website as there were a large bots attack. Is there a correlation between it bots attack and Google results? (but why not in Bing and Yahoo too?) It seems like Google underestimates the website when indexing websites for some reason. Moreover, some of the articles are really the best around but the keywords they are targeted are not either within the 30 first pages... Any help?? Thanks..
Technical SEO | | alex33andros0 -
Suggestions Required to Improve Ranking
My website URL is: http://goo.gl/AiOgu1 Hello, Recently my websites revoked from manual link penalty, impressions in GWT increased from 3K to 9K within 2 months, but most of all keywords are ranking on the 3rd, 4th and 5th page. Please suggest me some onpage changes.
Technical SEO | | sandeep.clickdesk0 -
How to rank in Google Places
Normally, I don't have a problem with local SEO (more of a multi-channel sort of online marketing guy) but this one has got me scratching my head. Look at https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=wedding+venues+in+essex Theres two websites there (fennes and quendon park) that both have a much more powerful DA but don't appear in the Google Places (Google + Business or whatever it's labeled as). Why are websites such as Boreham house ranking top in the map listings? Quendon Park has a Google places listing, it's full of content, the NAP all matches up. Its a stronger website. Boreham House isn't any closer to the centroid than Quendon Park Just got me struggling this one
Technical SEO | | jasonwdexter0 -
Exact match domain
Will buying an exact match domain and redirecting it to our main site a good idea, if such a domain is available ? What are the pros and cons ? Are exact match domains still powerful for ranking purpose ?
Technical SEO | | seoug_20050 -
We have Lost Ranking After Panda update
Hi, on the last Updates of google Panda in Europe, we hAve Lost Ranking. What to do now? where to Start! Which Things First and which Second..? Need help, Tell me how to fix issuess...
Technical SEO | | leadsprofi0 -
Targeting City via Web Server
Here's a question I can't seem to find an answer to. Does web hosting within a targeting city make a different in the engines? For example, a site targeting the Denver area, with web hosting in Denver. Will this boast the ranking or is targeting limited to countries? Thanks!
Technical SEO | | mkoster0