Hyphens vs Underscores
-
I am optimizing a site which uses underscores rather than hyphens as word separators (such_as_this.php vs. such-as-this.php). Most of these pages have been around since 2007, and I am hesitant to just redirect to a new page because I am worried it will cause the rankings to slip.
Would you recommend changing the file names to be in hyphenated format and place 301 redirects on the pages with underscores, or stick with the existing pages? Is there anything else that would work better?
Thanks!
-
I'll give you that - it's true that the result highlighting alone doesn't prove Google is viewing "shop ipad" as 2 words for ranking purposes. The tough part is separating out why these pages rank - I've seen plenty of URLs with underscores rank perfectly well, but there's no way to prove it isn't on other factors.
I think we're generally agreeing, though, that the potential risks probably outweigh what would probably be a very small boost at best. I'm also a little hesitant on having some pages with dashes and some with underscores, but that's probably just the UX side of me - it feels messy.
-
Some time ago I've changed all my urls from underscores to hyphens and I've lost some of my ranking for a while. After about a year we are back to where we were originally. I think it is a good idea to have it hyphened, but if you have good ranking it's really just a question whether they bother you much enough to go through a possible rank drop for a little while.
It's worth to mention that I wasn't bothered with doing the 301 redirect due to the large number of pages being affected, but instead I've started blogging more and the new content was quickly picked by the engines and helped the site to recover.
-
All due respect Dr Pete, this does not show that shop_ipad in the url is seen as shop ipad, only that it bolds in the results. this would be 2 different bits of technology doing these jobs.
Doc, I think you missed this video.
Matt stated this only a few months ago, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AQcSFsQyct8
He states for the forseeable future it wont be changing.
I agree its a small factor, and i suggested, only fix it on pages that dont have external links.
-
This is a great debate and some good comments all around, but I do think it's important to keep in mind that Matt's statements were from 2005 and 2009, and even the 2009 wording was a bit more nuanced. I strongly suspect Google has eased up on this early technical constraint. For example, try a search for "shop ipad" - you'll see this Apple.com URL in the Top 10:
store.apple.com/us/browse/home/shop_ipad/family/ipad/select
Google seems to have no trouble bolding "shop_ipad" as two words.
I still completely agree that, if you were starting fresh, I'd go with hyphens. A sitewide 301-redirect does carry some risk, though, so I think it boils down to this - are your pages ranking now for terms in the URL? If they seem to be ranking and it's just a matter of ranking better, I doubt the change would help much. If they seem to not be ranking at all and you suspect the URL terms are to blame, that's a different story.
Even in a perfect world, keywords in the URL are just one, relatively small factor. I'd want to see the data, but my gut reaction is to leave it alone until you need to make a sitewide URL change for other reasons.
-
Well it does, google has told us so.
Its quite simple, as matt cutts said thety treat blue_widget as a single term and do not seperate it into 2 words. They do seperate blue-widgets and even bluewidgets.
Unless you have some evidence that they have changed, then i will stick to what google has stated on the subject
-
No, I don't need to watch the videos I've seen and heard that stuff before. I'm just saying I don't buy the fact that blue-widgets vs. blue_widgets has any impact whatsoever on a sites ability to rank for "blue widgets".
Maybe a few years ago, but not today.
Hence I see no value in risking link equity to change from underscores to hyphens.
-
Hi Logan,I would like to tell you that the basic concept is to make the URL search engine friendly — and by friendly, we mean optimized to rank better.
The short answer is that you should use a hyphen for your SEO URLs. Google treats a hyphen as a word separator, but does _not _treat an underscore that way. Google treats and underscore as a word joiner — so red_sneakers is the same as redsneakers to Google. This has been confirmed directly by Google themselves, including the fact that using dashes over underscores will have a (minor) ranking benefit.
Again, SEO URLs should use hyphens to separate words. Do not use underscores, do not try to use spaces, and do not smash all the words together intoonebigword. As of 2011, dashes are still the best way to optimize your SEO URLs.
ccording to Matt Cutts - a senior software engineer at Google - he recommends using dashes for Google.
According to his article, "Dashes vs. underscores", if you have a URL like 'keyword1_keyword2' Google will only return that page if the user searches for 'keyword1_keyword2' (which almost never happens).
If you have a URL like 'keyword1-keyword2', that page can be returned for the searches for 'keyword1', 'keyword2', and even 'keyword1 keyword2'.
Don't forget to inform Googlebot and other search engine crawlers that a page has moved to a permanent location by adding 301 redirects to your web site's '.htaccess' file.
301 Redirect
For example:
Redirect 301 /old_directory http://www.example.com/new-directory
Redirect 301 /old_page.html http://www.example.com/new-page.html
Redirect 301 /old_directory/old_page.html http://www.example.com/new-directory/new-page.html
Note that the first URL only includes the directories (if any) and file name. The second URL must include the domain, in addition to the directory (if any) and file name. This is because the redirect may point to a file on another domain - it doesn't have to be on the same domain.
I hope that you will found the solution.
-
Gosh guys way to heat up the seemingly boring I like it.
Everyone makes interesting points. Alan, as always knows the code back and forth. Ben makes a good point as well (moderation, nothing wrong with that in SEO). I would have to say that when it comes to 301 redirects, as an agency that does a few site redesigns, client purchases of sites, etc. we do a few redirects. We also have clients who end up with multiple sites for one reason or another and we convince them to "merge." Here is what I know of 301 redirects. The common belief is that you lose up to 10% of the juice with a 301. My experience has been that it is not even close. When 301's are done appropriately (url to url in .htaccess say for apache) we do not see more than a 1 to 2% loss. That is from experience and not theory.
That said, I like what Alan says regarding Matt Cutts...If it was his $$ on the line. Understand that Matt has to be Googles non committal answerer of things SEO. How many times do you here him say Google absolutely does this and you should absolutely do that?
Using the one keyword _ versus the two keyword - , for me it would come down to if my _ were ranking really well and making me money, there would have to be some component of that ranking that is based on the keyword. Therefore, in spite of what I know about a 301, I would not change it. If it is there and not making me $$ I am going to go with a best practice in my opinion of hyphen vs. Underscore and make the 301.
you guys are fun, hope I added something.
Best to all,
-
I think what maybe getting overlooked is the fact that Google will or can separate words in a url. I have no official proof of that except if you go to Google and type something like "Bike Shop" the words "bike" and "shop" will be bolded in domains that contain the characters bikeshop.
This if nothing else suggest that Google can at least bold 2 words they are being treated as 1 word. Maybe Matt Cutts couldn't say this directly since it hints at something in Google's algorithm. Giving non-descriptive advice like "if it is well indexed I'd leave it alone" is better then saying don't worry we are breaking domains apart alphabetically to ascertain words.
It almost seems trivial to worry about something like that when there are so many other things that can be done SEO'wise. I've been on both sides of the fence and have taken solace in the words of Matt Cutts if it is already well indexed leave it alone, if it is a new page or one that is preforming crappy then use / change to dashes.
-
did you watch the video?
We know that keywords in a url are a ranking factor
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gRzMhlFZz9I
We know thay underscores do not seperate keywords http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q3SFVfDIS5k , so if you want to rank for blue widgets rather then blue_widgets then using undersscores would have a negative impact on rankings. -
Show me some examples where you think it impacts rankings....
**sorry didn't mean to sound arsey there I just don't think one variation its necessarily better than the other when it comes to rankings. I really do think it purely boils down to preference of how it looks.
Ben
-
i have to correct you,
google sees this as one word some_keyword
but sees this as 2 words some-keyword
See link Donford posted
-
I was considering doing the same thing a couple of weeks back and decided the change wasn't worth it.
-
Hyphenated URLs do generally speaking just look nicer, but how likely is that to impact things like UX or CTR rates? (unlikely). It certainly doesn't impact rankings - just do some generic searches and you'll find a real mixed bag of hyphens and underscored URLs in the listings.
-
If your underscored URLs have been around for a long time then chances are you have some link equity built up into at least some of those URLs. 301 redirecting from underscored to hyphenated versions of the same content is an unnecessary risk to some of that link equity.
If I had a relatively new site, low traffic from organic search and no real link equity then I probably would take the plunge and update from underscores to hyphens, but it would be an almost cosmetic move based on my own personal preferences. In your case I would advise against updating the URLs unless the domain has no pre-existing equity to give up.
Ben
-
-
Donford is correct in that is what matt cutts said, but i bet you if matts cutts main souce of income came from his web site he would change them.
You will lose a some link juice if you 301 redirect, i would look at the in-comming links, if the pages in question have little in links then i would change them. If you do, make sure you change all youyr internal links to point to the new format, dont allow internal links to go thought a redirect when you have controle of them.
-
Hi Logan,
I was faced with the similar question a couple years ago when I started with my current company.
The short answer is no, do not change a url that is currently using underscores to hyphens if it is well indexed.
If you're making a new page, then you should probably use hyphens instead of underscores.
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
-
On page vs Off page vs Technical SEO: Priority, easy to handle, easy to measure.
Hi community, I am just trying to figure out which can be priority in on page, off page and technical SEO. Which one you prefer to go first? Which one is easy to handle? Which one is easy to measure? Your opinions and suggestions please. Expecting more realistic answers rather than usual check list. Thanks
Algorithm Updates | | vtmoz0 -
Paying a premium or going with a hyphenated domain
Q1. I have two domains I am interested and the are available, however, they are "premium" at $1,000! According to GoDaddy, another domain site, just said available through action.
Algorithm Updates | | brandon_solutions
Any recommendations? If I have to pay, is there an auction site or broker you would recommend or another approach to try to get it at a lower price? Q2. The hyphenated domains are available and affordable. However some of the information I gathered on MOZ mentions Google flags it as spam. I believe that article was dated 2014. Is that still a risk or has Google through AI or something else determine spam another way now?0 -
Google ranking impact: Returning visitor vs New visitor
Hi all, If a website's traffic increase in "New visitors"; will this impact rankings? Do the website overall traffic affect rankings? How much this is related with ranking improvement for main keywords? Just because thousands of visits increased for website, will it count as a strong ranking improvement signal? Thanks
Algorithm Updates | | vtmoz0 -
Http vs Https Related Rankings Drop?
I've noticed in a number of keyword ranking tools (Moz included) that our rankings have dropped substantially for a number of our top performing keywords precisely 7 days back. When you view the attached screenshot you'll see there was a drastic drop in the overall organic impressions as well as a drop in keyword rankings. I also noticed that all the keywords which have dropped in rank now show with the https version of our home page url. I've read up on this and it believe that this should not cause a drop in rankings but we have even added https as a domain in webmaster tools with no improvement. Quite simply, has Google de-indexed our http home page url which was previously tied to our higher rankings for our core keywords? How can we get this back without "disavowing" our https version of the site. We're not doing anything to game search results so I dont think we're being penalized, simply there is some sort technical glitch taking place between recognizing HTTP vs HTTPS versions of our site. Our home page is goo.gl/qVPRwf and an example keyword is "wedding ring sets his and hers" Can anyone recommend further debugging steps or have an understanding of what can be done at this point? Also, if it helps, I have studied the Help Center, read the FAQs and searched for similar questions with no success.wedding ring sets his and hers impressions%20-%20ranking%20drop.png?dl=0
Algorithm Updates | | punitshah0 -
Complete website redesign: original domain vs subdomain vs new domain ?
Hello dear community fellas!
Algorithm Updates | | PayPro
The story goes like this: my company has a good ol' website launched back in 2008 and since then nothing much was updated there. Our rank dropped significantly because, well, barely any SEO was done for it. Me and my team decided to redesign the whole thing: content, structure, visuals, links, everything but this time really making it right. However, with our oldie we managed to get a nice user base, so we still want to get all the traffic juice out of it. Now the questions is where do you think is the best place to publish our new website: Our original domain www.companyname.com? Create a subdomain new.companyname.com? Totally new domain www.namecompany.com? Cheers!0 -
Did .org vs. .com SEO importance recently changed?
I have seen previous answers in the Forum about this subject but Google has seemed to have again changed the playing surface. Within the past 30 days, we have seen a huge spike in organic search returns seeming to favor .org as domain authorities. Has anyone else noticed this shift and is it just coincidence or worth factoring in? If it is a shift, will Google punish those that have .org but have used.com previously for switching the redirects to serve .org first? Thanks, Jim
Algorithm Updates | | jimmyzig0 -
Branded vs non-branded query
So there's an obvious difference between a branded and non-branded search term, but I'm interested in the SERPs that are shown as a result. Branded search only results in 7 listings on the first page - obviously because branded search is generally more navigational in nature and the lower results get minimal CT. Are their any technical differences beyond this? Also, how does google define a branded search term? Because a search for Vodafone or Dell show reduced results, but Coca Cola does not. Thanks guys 🙂
Algorithm Updates | | underscorelive0 -
Hyphenated Words as Keywords what is spam?
Do you know of any evidence that explains how Google or any SE would handle pages with words that are commonly hyphenate? Our site for example has a large O-ring section. A couple years ago when we did our SEO we used Google's keyword tool and found that these words all have different Cost Per Click, Global / Local searches. O-Rings
Algorithm Updates | | donford
O-Ring
oring
o-ring So we assumed they were each unique keywords and designed our pages to alternate usage of the terms as they are fairly interchangeable. However we have not achieved the position we would have expected from all that work, now while I'm doing another SEO pass with the tools here.. I want to make sure we don't spam them, but still cover all our bases. Thanks for any tips, advice or links.0