Moz Q&A is closed.
After more than 13 years, and tens of thousands of questions, Moz Q&A closed on 12th December 2024. Whilst we’re not completely removing the content - many posts will still be possible to view - we have locked both new posts and new replies. More details here.
Branded vs Generic keywords - is Google treating their rank equaly!?
-
Several times I have noticed that website receiving sort of a rankings drop penalty for certain wrongly built on-page strategies that involves keyword stuffing, wrong keyword density(too much) etc.
The question is - how you guys think - is branded keywords receiving the same treatment from Google then generic ones?
And here is why - for one popular brand I see that they ranking for their brand keyword very high(1th) but keyword density is awful - more then 10%. So, my guess is - if this keyword density you would apply for generic keyword you will end up nowhere to be found for it!
Is that could be truth? Any experiments info about that?
thanks and regards,
Jungles
-
Jarno,
Thank you very much for reply! I'm happy that I'm not alone here
Your experience proved even more my assumption that Brand keywords are treated differently then generic once! So, it's - 2:0 at the moment! Would love to hear opposite!
Regards,
Jungles
-
Jungles,
I don't have any info about experiments on that but I do have something else. A client of mine updates their own pages using Adobe Contribute. I told him not to repeat the keyword he wanted to rank for to many times due to a penalty by Google that could occur. He didn't listen and added 5 sequences of the keywords (keyword contains 4 words). This brought the percentile of the keyword on that page above 15%. Since then.. he ranks number one for that specific keyword and no penalty what so ever.
So just assuming that a 10% density wouldn't work for generic keywords is not helpful nor is it true but personally i would no go that far. When using brand names it is a bit different. It makes it more natural sometimes. Using a brand name in each sentence for one could be considered very natural while other people might think it's spamming behavior.
I feel like it's more a flip of an coin and I wouldn't take the change. It would focus on other aspects to rank for the keyword then density.
Hope my advice might help you along a bit
kind regards
Jarno
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
-
A Solution to Keywords Being Grouped in Google Keyword Planner
Hi guys, I am trying to get search traffic for a list of keywords which I put together a few years ago for one of my clients, this was before Google made changes to their Keyword Planner. When I am adding the list into Google Keyword Planner it is "grouping" a number of the keywords/phrases together, and therefore removing 13 of the keywords from the original list of 59 keywords. Is there a way around this so I can get search volume for the original list, and not the cut down one? I am specifically using Google Keyword Planner as I want to get search volume for a number of specific locations in the UK. Any comments/feedback is greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance! Jack. I19Op
Keyword Research | | ChemistryMarketing1 -
Keywords with no search volume
Hi there! What are your thoughts on optimizing pages for keywords that have no search volume (using the Keyword Planner)? I'm not sure it should be done, since optimizing for keywords that no one searches for is kind of useless, right? Or should I do it hoping that sometime in the future the keyword will have a surge on searches? Thanks!
Keyword Research | | sararufo0 -
Why does this keyword have much greater volume in Bing Keyword Research Tool than Google AdWords Keyword Planner?
I'm using the Google AdWords keyword planner and Bing Webmaster Keyword Research tool. For both, I'm trying to get accurate search volume for the exact term "advertising sales". Over the last thirty days, Bing reports a volume of 5,988. Google's average monthly search volume is 880. Given the market share Google has, I would expect a much higher volume, especially when compared to Bing. Can you offer some ideas of why this might be happening?
Keyword Research | | Kevin_P0 -
How to get search volume in Google's keyword planner
I want to know the search volume for ~1000 keywords that I discovered via ubersuggest. Yesterday I could have done this in 5 minutes, but I can't seem to get it to work in the new Google tool and would love some advice. When I either upload or copy and paste my list into the tool I can get it to give me search ideas with volume, but it has all the keywords I am uploading as 0 search volume (when I know that is not true and some of them have thousands of searches). I've tried "entering keywords to see how they perform" and also "searching for keyword ideas" (the second just because the first didn't try after my 10 tries) Any ideas about what I am doing wrong?
Keyword Research | | theLotter
Or is this a bug other people have been experiencing?0 -
Best tool to check keyword ranks in bulk
What is the most accurate tool to check the current ranking of keywords in bulk and download the report via CSV/Excel? Any input would be appreciated.
Keyword Research | | inhouseseo0 -
Keyword cannibalization - blog posts vs. site content
As an example, I am trying to rank for the term "ice cream". I have site content pages that relate to "chocolate ice cream", "vanilla ice cream", etc.These content pages have been SEO optimized using best practices. Would I be ruining my SEO work if I begin to publish blog posts for the same keywords that my content pages target? Am I basically forced to find alternative keywords and only target one page per keyword?
Keyword Research | | jcph0 -
Broad Vs. Exact Match
My question seems basic in nature but some recent keyword research has caused me to re-think broad vs. exact match. I was taught to focus on exact match for the short term and broad match for the long term prospects of a keyword. Today I was researching a niche of keyword phrases where the local search volume (broad) was, for example 33,000. The local search volume (exact) was only 500. What I know about broad vs. exact doesn't help me to determine if this keyword is worth going after. The keyword difficulty score by the way was 35% Yes, I do know that I will probably go after this keyword anyway but to refine my question, how do I get an idea of how "big" this keyword is? Is it more on the broad or more on the exact match of things? How do I determine the various derivatives of the phrase that occur under the broad match?
Keyword Research | | leaseman0 -
Is "in" a keyword differentiator?
Does google view phrases with "in" in then as different keywords than the same phrase without an "in"? For example: is "great restaurants in chicago" the same keyword as "great restaurants chicago"? Whenever I do research on two phrases like this, they always come up with the same search volume.
Keyword Research | | TheSquareFoot0