What is the most optimal URL structure
-
A colleague and I are discussing the most optimal URL structure for both search engines and users. Our first disagreement comes in terms of files.
So for instance if I have a small site, www.abc.com, with a service landing page and 3 specific services, which structure is preferred?
The second issue is in terms of breaking up words in the URL. Should you use hyphens or not? Using the first example, which is preferred?
I'm also looking for articles/case studies that support either side. Thank you in advance for your help!
-
"I don't think Google is sophisticated enough to breakup a string into words without hyphens"
I wonder though... they might very well use the same algo that they use when you misspell something in the search box on google.com
Try typing in two conjoined words and it manages to separate them asking, "Did you mean..."
You brought up an interesting point.
-
Don't forget to consider how your URL structure can help with effective Google Analytics tracking. Lunametrics has a good post on designing a GA-friendly site structure at http://www.lunametrics.com/blog/2010/09/22/designing-google-analytics-friendly-site/
-
There are quite a few factors at play here.
1. I've always preferred, as a developer, to have end-pages split up into categories and sub-categories for ease of development. However, it also let's the user know where they are within the site simply by looking at the URL.
There really is no right or wrong. You just have to do what makes sense for the site. If we're talking a micro-site here, with only a handful of pages, then you don't need to create categories and sub-categories. Just make a straight up URL, ie. /vacuum-services.html instead of doing /services/vacuums/
Remember to try and keep your preferred keywords to the foremost left of the URL to ensure some significance is placed on them. Not imperative, but if you can, I'd suggest it.
2. Always use hyphens to break up a word. Underscores are seen as a form of concatenation by search engines, whereas hyphens are seen as separators. Using neither is not recommended as it's not legible to the end-user and ultimately just forms one large word comprised of several keywords. No good.
-
I'd suggest keeping the page as close to the root domain as possible. Don't put directories in-between as you did in the following example: www.abc.com/services/service1
Also, utilize hyphens to separate the words. I don't think Google is sophisticated enough to breakup a string into words without hyphens (could be wrong).
Lastly, if you're planning on trying to get into Google News, one of the requirements is to have a 3+ digit string in your URL. So something along the lines of www.abc.com/home-remodeling-123
Hope that helps!
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
-
Do we take a SEO hit for having multiple URLs on an infinite scroll page vs a site with many pages/URLs. If we do take a hit, quantify the hit we would suffer.
We are redesigning a preschool website which has over 100 pages. We are looking at 2 options and want to make sure we meet the best user experience and SEO. Option 1 is to condense the site into perhaps 10 pages and window shade the content. For instance, on the curriculum page there would be an overview and each age group program would open via window shade. Option 2 is to have an overview and then each age program links to its own page. Do we lose out on SEO if there are not unique URLS? Or is there a way using metatags or other programming to have the same effect?
Algorithm Updates | | jgodwin0 -
Is having an identical title, h1 and url considered "over optimization"? Is it better to vary?
To get some new pages out without over-thinking things, I decided to line up the title tag, h1 tag and URLs of my pages exactly. They are dynamically generated based on the content the user is viewing (internal search results pages) They're not ranking very well at the moment, but there are a number of factors that are likely to blame. But, in particular, does anyone know if varying the text in these elements tends to perform better vs. having them all identical? Has there been any information from Google about this? Most if not all of the "over optimization" content I have seen online pertains to backlinks, not on-page content. It's easy to say, "test it!" And of course, that's just what I'm planning to do. But I thought I would leverage the combined knowledge of this forum to see what information I could obtain first, so I can do some informed testing, as tests can take a while to see results. Thanks 🙂
Algorithm Updates | | ntcma0 -
Optimizing for Lawyer vs Attorney Words
With Hummingbird update, my client's personal injury lawyer site went from very good positions for top terms in Google to oblivion. The site had primary landing pages for parallel terms such as "dog bite lawyer" and "dog bite attorney", among other. He does work in Philadelphia and Pennsylvania, so we focus on key phrases for both "Philadelphia dog bite lawyer" and "Pennsylvania dog bite lawyer" etc. I've decided to investigate siloing more deeply, but am unsure whether Google now considers attorney searches to be the same as lawyer searches, which would mean we would silo for "Pennsylvania" and "Philadelphia" not "Attorney" and "Lawyer". Any real world experience in this anyone? Thanks
Algorithm Updates | | JCDenver0 -
Is this spamming keywords into a url?
My company has previously added on extensions to a url like the example below http://www.test.com/product-name/extra-keywords My question is since there is no difference between the pages http://www.test.com/product-name and http://www.test.com/product-name/extra-keywords and you don't leave the product page to reach the extra-keyword page is this really necessary? I feel like this is probably not a best practice. Thanks for any suggestions.
Algorithm Updates | | Sika220 -
Using a stop word when optimizing pages
I have a page (for a spa) I am trying to fully optimize and, using AdWords have run every conceivable configuration (using Exact Match) to ascertain the optimal phrase to use. Unfortunately, the term which has come up as the 'best' phrase is "spas in XXX" [xxx represents a location]. When reviewing the data, phrases such as "spas XXX" or "spa XXX" doesn't give me an appropriate search volume to warrant optimizing. So, with that said, do I optimize the page without the word "in", and 'hope' we get the search volume for searches using the word "in", or optimize using the stop word? Any thoughts? Thank you!
Algorithm Updates | | MarketingAgencyFlorida0 -
Should We Switch from Several Exact Match URLs to Subdomains Instead?
We are a company with one product customized for different vertical markets. Our sites are each setup on their own unique domains:
Algorithm Updates | | contactatonce
contactatonce.com (Brand)
autodealerchat.com (Auto Vertical)
apartmentchat.com (Apartment Vertical)
chatforrealestate.com (Real Estate Vertical) We currently rank well on the respective keyword niches including:
- auto dealer chat (exact match), automotive chat, dealer chat
- apartment chat (exact match), property chat, multifamilly chat
- chat for real estate (exact match), real estate chat To simplify the user experience we are considering moving to a single domain and subdomain structure: contactatonce.com
auto.contactatonce.com
apartment.contactatonce.com
realestate.contactatonce.com QUESTIONS:
1. Considering current Google ranking strategies, do we stand to lose keyword related traffic by making this switch?
2. Are there specific examples you can point to where an individual domain and subdomains each ranked high on Google across a variety of different niches? (I'm not talking about Wikipedia, Blogger, Blogspot, Wordpress, Yahoo Answers, etc. which are in their own class, but a small to mid size brand). Thank you,
Aaron0 -
SinglePlatform's Restaurant Menu Across Web Properties vs "SEO-Optimized"
Surprised I wasn't able to find an existing answer given that SinglePlatform apparently serves 500,000 SMBs with menus that appear on over 150 publisher websites. Given Panda's razor-sharp intolerance for duplicate content, am I safe to assume that any claim of SinglePlatform's menu on a local restaurant being beneficial to your SEO is now spurious? If so, what's best way to handle this as a potential SEO liability while still having one of their nicely formatted restaurant menus on your site? For reference: http://www.openforum.com/articles/using-singleplatform-to-build-a-digital-presence Update May 7, 2012 Connected directly with the folks at SinglePlatform, and the answer here is a lot simpler than my over-thinking of it. The menu usually sits within an iFrame or widget so that's that. But the ability to truthfully show an up-to-date menu for any given establishment is a legit way to address the healthy amount of local search intent that seems to be directed at exactly that. Overall a pretty slick platform, looking forward to seeing how they grow into the SMB, local & mobile in the coming months, I think the space is ripe to benefit from products/services that take advantage of these sorts of economies of scale.
Algorithm Updates | | mgalica0 -
Any ideas on how Google +1 handles URLs and canonicals?
If your URL string shows up in a search and they +1 the URL with the coding in it will the +1 transfer to the canonical page? Example: site.com/locations/arizona/?utm_source=go gets a Google +1 from a user. The page itself has a canonical for site.com/locations/arizona/ Does google credit the canonical with the +1 or do they then have dup pages with separate +1 scores?
Algorithm Updates | | Thos0030