Http:// vs http://www.
-
Why is it that when I run an "On Page Optimization Keyword Report" for my website I get a different score when using http://www.tandmkitchens.com vs http://tandmkitchens.com.
My keyword is "Kitchen Remodeling"
http://www.tandmkitchens.com scores an A
http://tandmkitchens.com scores a B
It's the same page yet one url scores higher than the other.
Any help!
Thanks
Gary -
Alan, I was only talking about the on page report. Good oversight on your part.
Thanks again
-
Alan great indepth feedback on assigned value.
-
I think gary was talking about the on page report, that only looks at on page factors not links
-
Great Stuff Alan. Thank you so much for the input. I owe you a pint!
-
Generally speaking, every internal link, and every external link pointing into your site, every social or web mention of one or the other, will have an impact. So if, for example, there are 10 links pointing to www.tandemkitchens.com and 8 pointing to tandemkitchens.com, the www version will be given more weight.
Where it gets more complex is how well search engines and evaluation tools do at compensating for ranking signals when both www and non www are indexed or capable of being indexed. Allowing both to be will inevitably lead to imperfect algorithmic evaluations - there's no perfect system that can properly discern that both versions are not meant to be unique (thus causing algorithmically perceived duplicate content conflicts). And ultimately, that leads to an inaccurate distribution of assigned value.
It's for these reasons that one should be chosen as the standard, 301 redirects created, and every attempt possible then made to have links standardized (the least controllable factor being how others choose to link to you. Yet with 301 redirects, you at least ensure the most ranking value possible be passed from the non-indexed version even if links point to it.
-
My thoughts exactly Alan "Weird"
I'll try the 301 redirect to www.
Thanks for the help!
-
that is wierd, what about your indervidual scores, all your ticks are they all the same?
You know you should have a 301 to www or non www,
http://perthseocompany.com.au/seo/reports/violation/the-page-contains-multiple-canonical-formats
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
-
Resolving 301 Redirect Chains from Different URL Versions (http, https, www, non-www)
Hi all, Our website has undergone both a redesign (with new URLs) and a migration to HTTPS in recent years. I'm having difficulties ensuring all URLs redirect to the correct version all the while preventing redirect chains. Right now everything is redirecting to the correct version but it usually takes up to two redirects to make this happen. See below for an example. How do I go about addressing this, or is this not even something I should concern myself with? Redirects (2) <colgroup><col width="123"><col width="302"></colgroup>
Technical SEO | | theyoungfirm
| Redirect Type | URL |
| | http://www.theyoungfirm.com/blog/2009/index.html 301 | https://theyoungfirm.com/blog/2009/index.html 301 | https://theyoungfirm.com/blog/ | This code below was what we added to our htaccess file. Prior to adding this, the various subdomain versions (www, non-www, http, etc.) were not redirecting properly. But ever since we added it, it's now created these additional URLs (see bolded URL above) as a middle step before resolving to the correct URL. RewriteEngine on RewriteCond %{HTTP_HOST} ^www.(.*)$ [NC] RewriteRule ^(.*)$ https://%1/$1 [R=301,L] RewriteCond %{HTTPS} !on RewriteRule (.*) https://%{HTTP_HOST}%{REQUEST_URI} [R=301,L] Your feedback is much appreciated. Thanks in advance for your help. Sincerely, Bethany0 -
Deleted/Merged Content on Site Migration
Hey Moz Community! Looking for some input on a site migration. When redirecting some old pages that aren't going to be moved over to the new site, do you prefer to redirect to a homepage (or similar page) or to throw up a 404/410 on the new site? What have you found works best?
Technical SEO | | iSTORM-New-Media1 -
Meta Description VS Rich Snippets
Hello everyone, I have one question: there is a way to tell Google to take the meta description for the search results instead of the rich snippets? I already read some posts here in moz, but no answer was found. In the post was said that if you have keywords in the meta google may take this information instead, but it's not like this as i have keywords in the meta tags. The fact is that, in this way, the descriptions are not compelling at all, as they were intended to be. If it's not worth for ranking, so why google does not allow at least to have it's own website descriptions in their search results? I undestand that spam issues may be an answer, but in this way it penalizes also not spammy websites that may convert more if with a much more compelling description than the snippets. What do you think? and there is any way to fix this problem? Thanks!
Technical SEO | | socialengaged
Eugenio0 -
WWW and Without WWW Backlinks
I have just seen through ahrefs and found without WWW have more backlinks instead of WWW. Is there any way to forward all those without WWW to WWW domain, is there any harm or effect in serp ranking?
Technical SEO | | chandubaba0 -
SEOMoz Crawler vs Googlebot Question
I read somewhere that SEOMoz’s crawler marks a page in its Crawl Diagnostics as duplicate content if it doesn’t have more than 5% unique content.(I can’t find that statistic anywhere on SEOMoz to confirm though). We are an eCommerce site, so many of our pages share the same sidebar, header, and footer links. The pages flagged by SEOMoz as duplicates have these same links, but they have unique URLs and category names. Because they’re not actual duplicates of each other, canonical tags aren’t the answer. Also because inventory might automatically come back in stock, we can’t use 301 redirects on these “duplicate” pages. It seems like it’s the sidebar, header, and footer links that are what’s causing these pages to be flagged as duplicates. Does the SEOMoz crawler mimic the way Googlebot works? Also, is Googlebot smart enough not to count the sidebar and header/footer links when looking for duplicate content?
Technical SEO | | ElDude0 -
Robots.txt to disallow /index.php/ path
Hi SEOmoz, I have a problem with my Joomla site (yeah - me too!). I get a large amount of /index.php/ urls despite using a program to handle these issues. The URLs cause indexation errors with google (404). Now, I fixed this issue once before, but the problem persist. So I thought, instead of wasting more time, couldnt I just disallow all paths containing /index.php/ ?. I don't use that extension, but would it cause me any problems from an SEO perspective? How do I disallow all index.php's? Is it a simple: Disallow: /index.php/
Technical SEO | | Mikkehl0 -
Www vs non-www
We just had our site redesigned. Previously, it was indexed under www.suss.net, but now the developer has it at suss.net with www.suss.net 301 redirecting to suss.net. Is this bad for SEO?
Technical SEO | | kylesuss0 -
Keywords in file names vs folder names
We understand the value of a keyword phrase included in the URL. Is there more value to having that phrase in the folder name of the URL or the file name or does it matter? Example: http://www.biztoolsone.com/website-design.php or http://www.biztoolsone.com/website-design/ Which is best? Thanks, Wick Smith
Technical SEO | | wcksmith0