Does having a "+" in a URL hurt SEO? Would much value be gained changing it to a hyphen?
-
There's a site that contains "+" signs in the URL in order to call different information for the content on the page. Would it be better to change those to hyphens (-), or not that much value will be gained, so leave them as is?
Thanks!
-
Here is what I posted last time this came up:
I would get those re-written to dashes for a few different reasons:
- Dashes are known as the best way to separate terms in URLS
- IMO dashes are easier to read by the user, and easier to remember thus more user friendly (just my opinion though no data behind this)
- Plus signs are often used in URL encoding or in query strings, both of which are not great for users, and both of which have been thought of in the past to look somewhat "off putting" to search engines compared to dashes.
So while it might be a pain I would say go to dashes.
Also here is link someone posted last time about an article Rands wrote in 2006:
-
You should use hyphens rather than plus signs if possible.
Plus signs are a "reserved" character normally used in dynamic URLs and could cause confusion for the web crawlers which could lead to pages not getting indexed.
However, if you have been using plus signs and don't have any issues with those pages not being indexed, you can probably safely leave them in place. There are sites that use plus signs without any problem. If those pages already have lots of inbound links, you would need to do 301 redirects or use a rewrite to change the plusses to hyphens. Apparently plus signs can be recognized as separators like a hyphen, so there is probably no significant difference in regard to SEO.
So if it isn't going to be a huge hassle with redirects etc, I would recommend changing to hyphens.
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
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
-
To hyphenate or not to hyphenate?
Quick question: does Google differentiate between terms that correctly include a hyphen (such as "royalty-free") and those that are incorrect ("royalty free")? I ask because the correct term "royalty-free"(with a hyphen) receives far less monthly traffic for the same term without the hyphen (according to Moz): Term | Estimated traffic
On-Page Optimization | | JCN-SBWD
"royalty free music" | 11.5-30.3K
"royalty-free music" | 501-850 If Moz views the terms separately then I'd guess that Google does too, in which case the best thing to do for SEO (and increased site traffic) would be to wrongly use "royalty free" without the hyphen. Is that correct?0 -
Will changing a URL negatively affect ranking?
Hello Mozzers, We would like to change the URL for a page on our website which ranks well for some our keyphrases/words. We are hoping the change of URL, through the addition of an additional keyword would help boost the rank of that URL further. At the moment out page gets 2 x A and 2 x B 1xF on the MOZ page rank tool using 5 keyphrase/word variations . One phrase ranks 4, one ranks 3 and the other 3 are 'not in the top 50' Our plan was to change the URL, using SHF404, and use 'Fetch' in the Google search console to re-submit the page to Google. Appreciate you can't give any guarantees how Google will behave, just wondered what your thoughts were on the wisdom of changing the URL in the first place? Thanks Ian
On-Page Optimization | | Substance-create0 -
URL Keyword Variations?
I'm aware that keywords in the url aren't as effective as they used to be, but I'm still convinced that they do have a significant impact (based on results in one of the niches I'm in). My question is, will variations of keywords and "hidden" keywords have as much value as an exact keyword? For example, let's say that I'm trying to target the keyword "day." Will including variations like "daily" in the url work just as well? What about a brand name that includes the keyword hidden in its name, like "Dayest"? And, as a followup question, does including "stop" words have any effect? For example, if I'm trying to target the keyword "Day of the Month", would including "day" and "month" in the url be just as effective as including "day of the month"?
On-Page Optimization | | JABacchetta0 -
Similar URLs
I'm making a site of LSAT explanations. The content is very meaningful for LSAT students. I'm less sure the urls and headings are meaningful for Google. I'll give you an example. Here are two URLs and heading for two separate pages: http://lsathacks.com/explanations/lsat-69/logical-reasoning-1/q-10/ - LSAT 69, Logical Reasoning I, Q 10 http://lsathacks.com/explanations/lsat-69/logical-reasoning-2/q10/ - LSAT 69, Logical Reasoning II, Q10 There are two logical reasoning sections on LSAT 69. For the first url is for question 10 from section 1, the second URL is for question 10 from the second LR section. I noticed that google.com only displays 23 urls when I search "site:http://lsathacks.com". A couple of days ago it displayed over 120 (i.e. the entire site). 1. Am I hurting myself with this structure, even if it makes sense for users? 2. What could I do to avoid it? I'll eventually have thousands of pages of explanations. They'll all be very similar in terms of how I would categorize them to a human, e.g. "LSAT 52, logic games question 12" I should note that the content of each page is very different. But url, title and h1 is similar. Edit: I could, for example, add a random keyword to differentiate titles and urls (but not H1). For example: http://lsathacks.com/explanations/lsat-69/logical-reasoning-2/q10-car-efficiency/ LSAT 69, Logical Reasoning I, Q 10, Car efficiency But the url is already fairly long as is. Would that be a good idea?
On-Page Optimization | | graemeblake0 -
Keyword in URL?
I have a website that has been live for about 8yrs. I do not have any significant rankings for my main keywords but am now starting SEO on my site. I am contemplating changing the url to contain the main keyword prefixed by my brand name. Any views on the ranking benefits and or CTR benefits.
On-Page Optimization | | Johnnyh
Example:
Main Volume keyword - 'car leasing'
current url - www.bobleasing.co.uk (made up name) thinking of changing to - www.bobcarleasing.co.uk (made up name) Any advice would be much appreciated. John0 -
Latest SEO Factors
What is the most recent report you have for "factors" that impact SEO --- you guys had one a few years ago and I don't see a recent report. This was based on a panel of experts I believe.
On-Page Optimization | | mommybu0 -
How about this "onpage overoptimisation" everybody is talking about? Are the on-page optimisation reports still to be used?
Are the on-page optimisation reports still to be used? If we do check all factors we risk penalization because of latest Panda update?
On-Page Optimization | | MugurCosminFrunzetti0 -
Should my client remove "SEO" from the XML sitemap name?
I have suggested to a client with limited content on their site (considering it's in a very competitive sector with oceans of content possibilities!) that they probably shouldn't name the XML sitemap featuring their "seo content pages" (I hate that terminology BTW!) - google_sitemap_seo.xml My reasoning is that if I was a Google engineer or Google bot, I would probably ignore and disregard those pages because they are most likely poor quality content/doorway pages/boiler plate pages/ "enter your descriptive phrase here" pages. The push back from tech is that it doesn't make a difference so we're not going to do it.
On-Page Optimization | | Red_Mud_Rookie0