Pro's & contra's: http vs https
-
Hi there,
We are planning to take the step and go from http to https. The main reason to do this, is to mean trustfull to our clients. And of course the rumours that it would be better for ranking (in the future).
We have a large e-commerce site. A part of this site ia already HTTPS.
I've read a lot of info about pro's and contra's, also this MOZ article: http://moz.com/blog/seo-tips-https-ssl
But i want to know some experience from others who already done this. What did you encountered when changing to HTTPS, did you had ranking drops, or loss of links etc?I want to make a list form pro's and contra's and things we have to do in advance.
Thanx, Leonie
-
We don't use Comscore. Analytics transparently kept tracking everything without any change. We don't use Tagmanager url matching tracking, but unless you have not defined rules which include the url protocol it should not need any attention either.
-
Hi, did you encountered problems with other tools, like Google Analytics and or Tagmanager, Comscore?
Thanx, Leonie
-
We have expensive certificates now for the payed section, i think we'll use the same
i'll ask about the server support SNI, not sure about that, thanx
-
In case you choose the most expensive EV certificates as we did, for whatever is not directly visible, like the cdn serving js, css and images you can just use cheap 8 $/€ certificates.
One thing I forgot, if your server support SNI, don't use it.
We did initially, but soon found out some price engines could not read feeds, moz crawler could not crawl, and everyone on XP+IE was left out. So we disabled it.
-
Hi Max, Thansk, and good to read that you didn't lost ranking. that's my concern and also the backlinking. although you should say with a redirect all the external links i can't control will redirect to https.
We have 2 different ssl certificates now, we are looking for what we need and if we have the right ones.
If i've finished the plan and list i'll think i'll publish it here
Grtz, Leonie
-
I did it a month and half ago for a couple of websites.
Transition was smooth. I had to buy more ssl certificates than I thought for the many domains serving js css and so on... But was not a big hassle.
Just after moving from http to https I didn't notice any ranking change, and to have a good level of accurancy I monitor the same keywords with both moz ranktracker, proranktracker and semrush.
But in fact google is slowly recognizing the move few urls at time, each day you will notice some google serp start serving https url in place of http ones.
After a month we had a big jump in ranking, around +30% more keywords in the top 100 and a general increase in ranking for all the keywords already in top 10, top 30 and top 50.
But I have no idea if it's connected with the shift to https since we also constantly do many other things, get backlinks, improve on-page, etc...
At least it didn't seem to penalize the websites.
-
Hi Pixelbypixel, thanx for your reply.
Right now i'm making a plan for the switch, i'm not in a rush, so i really want to make it all clear before we go, or maybe decide not to..
I don't think most of our clients know what's secure and what isn't. But we want the opportunity to comunicate about this with our clients, something we don't have right now (only when the order something)
The ranking factor, what i read about it, is not a big thing at this moment, but indeed, in the future and can be a bigger one, so that's also a good reason to go.
Thanx for the linked articles!
Grtz, Leonie
-
I'm going to give my opinion more than a list of pros and cons, most people who switch over tend to see a drop in traffic and if you don't ensure you get it all right it can be a nightmare so make sure you've got your plan ready.
Are you sure most "clients" know what https is? Most people outside our world have no idea what it is combine with the fact that the so called ranking boost has yet to be well documented it can be fairly certain its tiny.
Now it is possible that your clients know what it is and will see it and go to your site but in most cases I suspect like the ranking boost other factors would play a bigger role. My advice is to really make sure you have all the bases covered for your transfer. Also wanted to point out in the future it may be a bigger factor.
As for advice on people who have already done it oodles of info here on Moz here are a few -
http://moz.com/community/q/http-to-https-transition-large-drop-in-search-traffic
http://moz.com/community/q/https-sitewide-move-has-resulted-in-huge-rankings-drop
http://moz.com/community/q/authority-site-drastic-ranking-drop-after-google-https-switch-please-help
Obviously people tend to come here for problems more than a shout out for how great it is so don't take that as a massive negative and all of the above is my opinion I'm sure some others will give other opinions and I don't want you to be put off just to be aware that there is a lot to cover in a switch over.
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
-
Forced Redirects/HTTP<>HTTPS 301 Question
Hi All, Sorry for what's about to be a long-ish question, but tl;dr: Has anyone else had experience with a 301 redirect at the server level between HTTP and HTTPS versions of a site in order to maintain accurate social media share counts? This is new to me and I'm wondering how common it is. I'm having issues with this forced redirect between HTTP/HTTPS as outlined below and am struggling to find any information that will help me to troubleshoot this or better understand the situation. If anyone has any recommendations for things to try or sources to read up on, I'd appreciate it. I'm especially concerned about any issues that this may be causing at the SEO level and the known-unknowns. A magazine I work for recently relaunched after switching platforms from Atavist to Newspack (which is run via WordPress). Since then, we've been having some issues with 301s, but they relate to new stories that are native to our new platform/CMS and have had zero URL changes. We've always used HTTPS. Basically, the preview for any post we make linking to the new site, including these new (non-migrated pages) on Facebook previews as a 301 in the title and with no image. This also overrides the social media metadata we set through Yoast Premium. I ran some of the links through the Facebook debugger and it appears that Facebook is reading these links to our site (using https) as redirects to http that then redirect to https. I was told by our tech support person on Newspack's team that this is intentional, so that Facebook will maintain accurate share counts versus separate share counts for http/https, however this forced redirect seems to be failing if we can't post our links with any metadata. (The only way to reliably fix is by adding a query parameter to each URL which, obviously, still gives us inaccurate share counts.) This is the first time I've encountered this intentional redirect thing and I've asked a few times for more information about how it's set up just for my own edification, but all I can get is that it’s something managed at the server level and is designed to prevent separate share counts for HTTP and HTTPS. Has anyone encountered this method before, and can anyone either explain it to me or point me in the direction of a resource where I can learn more about how it's configured as well as the pros and cons? I'm especially concerned about our SEO with this and how this may impact the way search engines read our site. So far, nothing's come up on scans, but I'd like to stay one step ahead of this. Thanks in advance!
Technical SEO | | ogiovetti0 -
Domain Authority vs. Page Authority: What’s More Important?
I have a couple of questions about this. First of all is one more important than the other? Also, I currently have a website setup for https://gogoanime.city. How is it possible to grow page authority yet I am having a hard time growing domain authority. Thank you !
Technical SEO | | gogoanimetp0 -
Is there an easy way to hide one of your URL's on google search?, rather than redirecting?
We don't want to redirect to a different page, as some people still use it, we just don't want it to appear in search
Technical SEO | | TheIDCo0 -
404 vs 410 vs 301
Hi guys, I am managing a real estate website, and obviously we have a LOT of pages detailing each property. As those properties get sold and removed from the website, I'm wondering how best to handle this - I know 404, 410 and 301's are all valid ways to go, but I want to provide the best UX combined with the best SEO effect. My thinking is to customise a 410 page to show the page has been permanently removed, and has a relevant message (rather than a generic 404 message) and shows a search box - possibly pre-populated according to the page they were looking for.
Technical SEO | | LoonyToons
I think this gives a good UX and helps Google to understand the importance of the 000's of pages on our website.
I'd also like to clear property detail 404's as quick as possible to make it easier to see if we have problems elsewhere on the site. Having explained this to our development/SEO agency, they are strongly pushing for 301 redirects or leave as 404.
I think 301's would be the worst for UX, and as explained earlier, the volume of 404's is massive and makes it difficult to see real errors. They seem to think this is a better UX and better for SEO. Just wondering what you guys would recommend?0 -
Why is Google's cache preview showing different version of webpage (i.e. not displaying content)
My URL is: http://www.fslocal.comRecently, we discovered Google's cached snapshots of our business listings look different from what's displayed to users. The main issue? Our content isn't displayed in cached results (although while the content isn't visible on the front-end of cached pages, the text can be found when you view the page source of that cached result).These listings are structured so everything is coded and contained within 1 page (e.g. http://www.fslocal.com/toronto/auto-vault-canada/). But even though the URL stays the same, we've created separate "pages" of content (e.g. "About," "Additional Info," "Contact," etc.) for each listing, and only 1 "page" of content will ever be displayed to the user at a time. This is controlled by JavaScript and using display:none in CSS. Why do our cached results look different? Why would our content not show up in Google's cache preview, even though the text can be found in the page source? Does it have to do with the way we're using display:none? Are there negative SEO effects with regards to how we're using it (i.e. we're employing it strictly for aesthetics, but is it possible Google thinks we're trying to hide text)? Google's Technical Guidelines recommends against using "fancy features such as JavaScript, cookies, session IDs, frames, DHTML, or Flash." If we were to separate those business listing "pages" into actual separate URLs (e.g. http://www.fslocal.com/toronto/auto-vault-canada/contact/ would be the "Contact" page), and employ static HTML code instead of complicated JavaScript, would that solve the problem? Any insight would be greatly appreciated.Thanks!
Technical SEO | | fslocal0 -
What's best practice for blog meta titles?
I have the option of placing meta titles on the actual blog, or on the blog category on my site. Should I have separate meta titles for each blog or bundle them under a category and try to drive traffic to the category? Can anyone help with best practice?
Technical SEO | | Lubeman0 -
Replacing H1's with images
We host a few Japanese sites and Japanese fonts tend to look a bit scruffy the larger they are. I was wondering if image replacement for H1 is risky or not? eg in short... spiders see: Some header text optimized for seo then in the css h1 {
Technical SEO | | -Al-
text-indent: -9999px;
} h1.header_1{ background:url(/images/bg_h1.jpg) no-repeat 0 0; } We are considering this technique, I thought I should get some advise before potentially jeopardising anything, especially as we are dealing with one of the most important on page elements. In my opinion any attempt to hide text could be seen as keyword stuffing, is it a case that in moderation it is acceptable? Cheers0 -
Will changing our colocation affect our site's link juice?
If we change our site's server location to a new IP, will this affect anything involving SEO? The site name and links will not be changing.
Technical SEO | | 9Studios0