Why am I seeing this in ahrefs?
-
I'm working on diagnosing the reason for a traffic drop for a site. When I look at the referring domains report in ahrefs I see a huge drop in the number of referring domains that happens exactly on the day of the traffic drop. However, when I look at the new/lost backlinks report there is no coinciding loss in links.
How is this possible?
-
I'm happy to help Marie. Yes, when I first saw it I was looking at a competitor and I yelled "yes!!!" and then I looked up my own sites and I yelled "nooo!!!" And then I realized something else was going on, LOL. Have a great weekend!
-
You are very welcome!
-
Well, I'll be darned! I put in a bunch of other websites and every one has a huge drop on November 27th. You're right...it's an ahrefs thing and not related to the site I am working on.
How weird that the ahref's drop across the board happened on the exact same day as this site's traffic drop!
I can explain most of what is going on with the site but could not explain a loss of several hundred domains linking to them. Dana...you saved my sanity tonight!
-
Thanks for sharing Dana!
-
Hi Marie,
I saw the same thing yesterday and it seemed odd that the drop was consistent across three totally unrelated websites. I dug a little deaper and discovered in the Ahrefs blog that they have recently updated their algorithm. They did put the text "Old Index" in the background of the chart, but that really didn't mean anything to me until I read their blog post here: http://ahrefs.com/news/
Hope that helps! I hope their new index is really better and not just different
Dana
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
-
I still see the old page in index
Hello, I have done a redirect and still see in google index my old page after 3 weeks. My new page is there also Is it normal that the old page isn't dropped for the index yet ? Thank you,
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | seoanalytics0 -
I am really surprised to see this page is ranking like crazy even the content is very thin
https://www.hackerearth.com/blog/artificial-intelligence/artificial-intelligence-101-how-to-get-started/ We are ranking for 121KW for this page. And 22KW are ranking in the 1-3 position. I am not able to understand why will it rank like anything. Considering that it has just 4 inbound links. Will some help me to understand this mystery. When we try to write a good in-depth content then we are not ranking but for such content, we are doing fairly good.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Rajnish_HE1 -
How long until I see an SEO impact from newly optimized site
We just recently launched a new version of our website. This new version allowed us to integrate research into technical SEO updates to enhance our search visibility. Based on experience from those viewing this post, what is a good average timeframe in which I should start seeing some effects from these changes in Google? I know this question is hard to answer because of all the variables that are part of the answer but I need something to take to the c-level as an estimate of what to expect. I figured experience might tell a good story here.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Smart_Start0 -
What are risks people are seeing with Widget links?
This September, Matt Cutts announced a new crackdown on widget links. But they clearly still work so it's a matter of scale and usage in IMO. Years ago I started recommending changing links within widgets to use branded anchor text instead of keyword rich anchor text so as not to create an unusual amount of keyword focused anchor text. It's also clearly more natural. So far this has been working very well. The new warning is concerning and I recognize the "best practice" according to Google would be to no-follow these links, but I'm not quite ready to do this unless a risk of unrecoverable penalty is apparent. My thoughts are it's a matter of scale. If there are tens of thousands of widget links and they dominate the link profile that would be a serious matter. If there are only thousands of widget links and they are a small part of the total link profile it is much less of a concern. Does anyone have any direct experience with getting warnings on this matter?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Envoke-Marketing1 -
Can anyone see any issues with the canonical tags on this web site?
The main domain is: http://www.eumom.ie/ And these would be some of the core pages: http://www.eumom.ie/pregnancy/ http://www.eumom.ie/getting-pregnant/ Any help from the Moz community is much appreciated!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | IcanAgency0 -
Penguin 2.1\. Bad links removed - do I need to wait for next Penguin upgrade to see recovery?
Hi - I have read conflicting advice about this issue - after taking action and removing bad links following a Penguin 2.1 hit, will the site need to wait for the next Penguin upgrade before the link clean-up has any effect? Or will the cleaning of the links be acknowledged and "rewarded" with a ranking improvement before that (assuming all bad links were cleared out)?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | StevieD0 -
Domain changed 5 months ago still see search results on old domain
Hi, We changed our domain from coedmagazine.com to coed.com in April'13. Applied 301 redirects on all pages, submitted 'change of address' to google but we still see site:coedmagazine.com fetching 130K results on google as opposed to site:coed.com fetches 40K results. Can anybody here throw some light on what might be going wrong? [ Site runs on wordpress, hosted with wordpress as well ] thank you
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | COEDMediaGroup0 -
How does Google index pagination variables in Ajax snapshots? We're seeing random huge variables.
We're using the Google snapshot method to index dynamic Ajax content. Some of this content is from tables using pagination. The pagination is tracked with a var in the hash, something like: #!home/?view_3_page=1 We're seeing all sorts of calls from Google now with huge numbers for these URL variables that we are not generating with our snapshots. Like this: #!home/?view_3_page=10099089 These aren't trivial since each snapshot represents a server load, so we'd like these vars to only represent what's returned by the snapshots. Is Google generating random numbers going fishing for content? If so, is this something we can control or minimize?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | sitestrux0