Internal Anchor Text - Partial or Exact Match Does It Matter?
-
When linking internally on an ecommerce site between pages and from a sitemap, is partial or exact match on the anchor text a significant factor?
If it matters to Google, which is a better practice to use? I found plenty of info on external links, but precious little on internal links (which suggests it doesn't matter enough to worry about).
-
I agree with EGOL and would add my belief that you should use any text you feel is most beneficial when using internal linking. Generally it will be exact match. I would make no effort to vary the text unless it was helpful for users.
Why? The entire concept of varying anchor text is based on Google knowing that links which are earned naturally are not under your control and therefore the anchor text will vary. Since all the links on your site are 100% under your control, the rules for external links should not apply. Let me clarify this is my logical thinking on the subject and I have no evidence to support this statement, but I do follow it myself.
-
I must say that I have spent very little time thinking about this. I have ecommerce sites and have not spent even one hour trying to get keyword anchor text into them from external sites in the past ten years.
Instead we create content that a few people link to and the links to that content are what power the sites. Nearly all of those links are followed and nearly all of those links have a domain, a URL, or a brand as the anchor text.
I have read what others say on this topic and people who I trust say that anchor text should be varied across a broad mix of keywords - and that would mean very few exact matches and a lot of partial matches.
-
I may have overlooked something - but wasn't the experiment referring to external anchor text?
-
Hi Erica. I checked that out as well as Cyrus' video. I'm curious if exact match for internal and partial match for external is best practice for an ecommerce site.
-
Check out this post: Which Type of Link Anchor Text is the Most Effective? [An Experiment]
-
Thanks EGOL. Your thoughts on partial match for external links to ecommerce sites?
-
I am very confident that anchor text on internal links passes value to the target page. It also can add optimization on the host page.
However, on an ecommerce site I would select internal anchor text that strongly and quickly communicates the destination content to the visitor.
Slap their face with your words.... "Green Widgets"
If you select anchor text that communicates the content of the target page to your visitor as strongly as a slap on the face then you have at the same time selected anchor text that will help you in the SERPs.
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
-
One click links, followed ? anchor text ?
Hello, Just wondering google follows on clicks links (links create in a nice button) and anchor text. Thank you,
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | seoanalytics0 -
Why our page not ranking even searching for exact h1 tag?
Even I search for exact h1 tag heading from our homepage, it's (homepage) not been showing up on TOP of the results. Other websites with partial match of search query are ranking above us; why this is happening? And other website with same text as normal paragraph is ranking on top. But not out h1 tag from homepage? How come normal text of unrelated website is ranking above h1 heading from homepage of own website?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | vtmoz0 -
What is Google supposed to return when you submit an image URL into Fetch as Google? Is a few lines of readable text followed by lots of unreadable text normal?
I am seeing something like this (Is this normal?): HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Autoboof
Server: nginx
Content-Type: image/jpeg
X-Content-Type-Options: nosniff
Last-Modified: Fri, 13 Nov 2015 15:23:04 GMT
Cache-Control: max-age=1209600
Expires: Fri, 27 Nov 2015 15:23:55 GMT
X-Request-ID: v-8dd8519e-8a1a-11e5-a595-12313d18b975
X-AH-Environment: prod
Content-Length: 25505
Accept-Ranges: bytes
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2015 15:24:11 GMT
X-Varnish: 863978362 863966195
Age: 16
Via: 1.1 varnish
Connection: keep-alive
X-Cache: HIT
X-Cache-Hits: 1 ����•JFIF••••��;CREATOR: gd-jpeg v1.0 (using IJG JPEG v80), quality = 75
��C•••••••••• •
••
••••••••• $.' ",#(7),01444'9=82<.342��C• ••••
•2!!22222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222��•••••v••"••••••��••••••••••••••••
•���•••••••••••••}•••••••!1A••Qa•"q•2���•#B��•R��$3br�
••••%&'()*456789:CDEFGHIJSTUVWXYZcdefghijstuvwxyz���������������������������������������������������������������������������•••••••••••••••••••
•���••••••••••••••w••••••!1••AQ•aq•"2�••B���� #3R�•br�0 -
Does 301 vs 302 matter when dealing with "social signal"?
When looking at links and how search engines look at "social signal," does it matter if a link is 301 vs 302? In addition to that, if I build out my own short URL system that gets used for link redirects that include referral attributes, would/could I get penalized if I use 301 instead of 302?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | JDatSB0 -
Blog not showing up when searching for exact post/META titles
I am working on a blog http://www.possessionista.com which is a very popular fashion blog. It is very well established with a 100% natural link profile and zero spammy stuff. The blog ranks #1 for random fashion terms like "kourtney kardashian cat eye sunglasses" and "emily maynard boots". The problem I am experiencing is that none of the actual titles of her posts or any of the content in the post results in her blog showing up if searched. EX: http://www.possessionista.com/2011/10/pippa-middletons-zip-jacket.html When you search "Pippa Middleton's Zip Jacket" on google her blog is nowhere to be found. Try searching allintitle:"Pippa Middleton's Zip Jacket" and she's nowhere to be found either. Even search "The other day, I met with my friend Kiran for our monthly mutual admiration society" on google and she's nowhere to be found even thoguh this is a unique snippet from her post. This post is already indexed and cached with the above mentioned details. i've also tested dozens of older posts as well. Same issue. You can actually do this to see a more clear picture: Do a google search for: allintitle:Bachelorette Fashion: Episode 2 - Ashley Hebert Brown site:possessionista.com That will bring up her blog which means google recognizes that the phrase is in her META title. Now do a google search for: allintitle:Bachelorette Fashion: Episode 2 - Ashley Hebert Brown without the site: included. She does not pop up but other people do. I did find that she had a duplicate title tag for a few weeks, but I've fixed that. Her posts used to pop up #1 when you search the title, but now obviously not. I am kind of at a loss and have tried a bunch of options with no success. Oh, one other thing is that some people do scrape her content, but only a few like maybe 10 and they've always been doing it even when she used to rank for her own post titles. Have you guys experienced this issue? Do you have any ideas of how to fix it?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | modparent0 -
Global/international SEO campaign strategy with a single TLD
Hi All, Have 3 seperate questions all relating to global/international SEO from a domain strategy point of view so will try to make them all short and 'to the point'. The current URL is www.example.com. The site's content strategy and all marketing activity has always been for the UK. We're now launching in US with also long term plans to launch in other countries. Each country will have their own webmaster/conternt strategy/marketing team. 1st question Which is better and why? www.example.com/us verses www.us.example.com The US team are leaning towards (and rightly so) the folder approach as it will help the US section of the site benefit from existing domain authority, link profile and off-page SEO work already carried out to a route domain level. This will also not be regarded as a new site as it's www.example.com/us On the flip side however the sub domain option although has no short term SEO benefits; will have a more sustainable SEO campaign for each country as they can be treated as individual sites/SEO campaigns. This also reduces some risk elements involved as each geo-specific team will only be concerned about their own sub-domain and not have route domain level control. I'm also aware that sub-domains will be treated as individual sites and therefore certain updates (such as Panda) will treat each sub-domain individually. So a possible negative impact on uk.example.com would not necessarily have an impact on us.example.com unless content strategy was the same. 2nd question Assuming we decide to go for www.example.com/us (folder option). The site's current geo target market is currently set to UK on Google Webmaster Tools to route domain level. If www.example.com was set to UK and www.example.com/us was set to US on GWT, would there be a conflict? We want to ensure that the route domain level settings does NOT override any settings on folder level within the same domain. Based on an answer from a top contributer of Google Webmaster Central, setting www.example.com/us to US would not be in conflict with settings within route domain level but I would love to hear/read from somebody that had actually gone through the process. 3rd question We're considering implementing geo DNS so a US visitor accessing www.example.com will be redirected to www.example.com/us (or www.us.example.com) based on their location from their IP address. Reason being is we're trying to avoid a splash page with a choice of countries (UK or US) on route level (homepage) which is very commonly used by most sites with multiple geo specific target markets. We would be assuming that somebody from North America would be looking for the US site and therefore redirecting the visitor automatically to www.example.com/us. The SEO implications are however that a 302 redirect will be used and therefore redirects used based on the visitors location will not pass link value from the homepage towards landing pages. The homepage currently has very strong link juice and the site's general navigational structure is pretty good allowing the link juice to flow through from the homepage.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | MoRaja1 -
Hidden Text? Part of the game or a major faux pas?
Hey all... I've been doing some competitive analysis lately on different niches in different cities, and upon looking at source code have noticed MANY sites(typically 2-3 of the top listed sites in each niche) who have hidden text, blocked by a box/logo, colored the same as the background, or both. Is this a typical practice? My understanding is Google seriously frowns on this, so is it worth reporting competitors who are doing such things? I don't see any grey areas in this matter and think it's a serious violation, but here these sites are at the top.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | dignan990 -
Site Wide Internal Navigation links
Hello all, All our category pages www.pitchcare.com/shop are linked to from every product page via the sidebar navigation. Which results in every category page having over 1700 links with the same anchor text. I have noticed that the category pages dont appear to be ranked when they most definately should be. For example http://www.pitchcare.com/shop/moss-control/index.html is not ranked for the term "moss control" instead another of our deeper pages is ranked on page 1. Reading a previous SEO MOZ article · Excessive Internal Anchor Text Linking / Manipulation Can Trip An Automated Penalty on Google
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | toddyC
I recently had my second run-in with a penalty at Google that appears to punish sites for excessive internal linking with "optimized" (or "keyword stuffed anchor text") links. When the links were removed (in both cases, they were found in the footer of the website sitewide), the rankings were restored immediately following Google's next crawl, indicating a fully automated filter (rather than a manual penalty requiring a re-consideration request). Do you think we may have triggered a penalty? If so what would be the best way to tackle this? Could we add no follows on the product pages? Cheers Todd0