Varying Internal Link Anchor Text with Each New Page Load
-
I'm asking for people's opinions on varying internal anchor text. Before you jump in and say, "Oh yes, varying your anchor text is always a good idea", let me explain.
I'm not talking about varying anchor text on different links scattered throughout a site. We all know that is a wise thing to do for a variety of reasons that have been covered in many places. What I'm talking about is including semi-useful links below the fold and then varying the anchor text with each page load. Each time Googlebot crawls a page, it sees different anchor text for each link. That way, Googlebot is seeing, for example, 'san diego bars', 'taverns in san diego', 'san diego clubs', and 'pubs in san diego' all pointing to a San Diego bar/tavern/club/pub page.
I'm wondering if there is value in this approach. Will it help a site rank well for multiple search queries? Could it potentially be better than static anchor text as it may help Google better understand the targeted page? Is it a good way to protect a large site with a huge number of internal links from Penguin?
To summarize, we're talking about the impact of varying the anchor text on a single page with each page load as opposed to varying the anchor text on different pages.
Thoughts?
-
Thanks for everyone's input!
Without pointing any fingers, let's just say this is happening in the wild right now. It came as a bit of a surprise to me as I wouldn't expect Google to be fooled into ranking a site better for multiple keywords based on dynamic internal anchor text. To be clear, I have no evidence this technique is helping or that the motivation is to game Google for better rankings, but I haven't come up with any other reason.
If it is working, I must admit, it's pretty clever...
-
I would say test it out and see what happens. I would love to know the result. ( youmoz post perhaps ? )
what I assume would happen :
The new link only counts when G-bot crawls the page ( and obviously not on each page load ), and each time Gbot crawls the page it will see that an old link is dropped and a new one is added. So what ever value you gain from the new link , you will lose from the old one which is no longer there. So I really don't see the value to be had from an SEO point of view . But repeat visitors to you page may click through to those pages. ( Again testing it will give you solid proof )
-
What comes to me is this: I don't think you'll get the value out of links with dynamic anchor text that you would get with anchor text that is static. A page's overall value and the value it passes on to other page via links is iterative--it's not assigned after just a single pass of the bot. The dynamism would devalue the links, if not render them worthless all together.
And even if you had one thousand variations of anchor texts for each link and they did pass some sort of value, what do you think that footprint would look like after a year or two of google crawls? Upon a manual review, someone there would say, "Huh, look at this, their links change all the time and each one is focused around a specific money term--I think it's obvious that they're trying to manipulate their rankings. Smack--here's a penalty for you."
-
Oh yes, varying your...oh wait sorry you didn't want that haha.
Erm this is an interesting idea - on first read my first thought was you're trying to game the system and that's never a good idea.
Then I thought a little more and I suppose it is very similar to dynamic content such as offers on your linking page, although it always points at one location.
I suppose it is only similar to changing your anchor text manually to see what works best, but I think that such frequent changes could end up getting noticed - a link anchor changing every time Google visits - surely Google is clever enough to notice this pattern and doesn't it smack of over-optimisation?
I bet others have already tried this - have you done any digging to see if you can find out what the impact was?
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
-
Rel=canonical and internal links
Hi Mozzers, I was musing about rel=canonical this morning and it occurred to me that I didnt have a good answer to the following question: How does applying a rel=canonical on page A referencing page B as the canonical version affect the treatment of the links on page A? I am thinking of whether those links would get counted twice, or in the case of ver-near-duplicates which may have an extra sentence which includes an extra link, whther that extra link would count towards the internal link graph or not. I suspect that google would basically ignore all the content on page A and only look to page B taking into account only page Bs links. Any thoughts? Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | unirmk0 -
Angular JS - Page Load
Website build in process in Angular JS. We are looking at prerendering the pages so its all good. However, because there are going to be few server requests, how would the page load be like for search engines? Also, on the client side (browser) would there be any impact if we prerender the pages? Cheers!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Malika10 -
Do Page Anchors Affect SEO?
Hi everyone, I've been researching for the past hour and I cannot find a definitive answer anywhere! Can someone tell me if page anchors affect SEO at all? I have a client that has 9 page anchors on one landing page on their website - which means if you were to scroll through their website, the page is really really long! I always thought that by using page anchors instead of sending users through to a dedicated landing page, ranking for those keywords makes it harder because a search spider will read all the content on that landing page and not know how to rank for individual keywords? Am I wrong? The client in particular sells furniture, so on their landing page they have page anchors that jump the user down to "tables" or "chairs" or "lighting" for example. You can then click on one of the product images listed in that section of the page anchor and go through to an individual product page. Can anyone shed any light on this? Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Virginia-Girtz1 -
Keyword rich internal linking - problem?
Had an interesting situation today.. We write daily news articles on our site. In each article we link out to two sources that we are writing about (credible sources) and we do one or two internal links. For example.. 'Today McDonald's have announced that they are purchasing more blue widgets in order to increase their opportunity to appeal to a larger market.' So in that sentence you can see one outbound link and one inbound to blue widgets on our site. I got an email today from a large company who we have written an article about in the industry and they have asked me to remove the link to their site.. I actually asked them why and this was their response. 'We're concerned because of the number of keyword-rich internal links in the article, and are worried that being included alongside them might be misinterpreted by Google as an artificial link.' Fristly, do they really have anything to be worried about?.. but more importantly, with our internal linking, do we have anything to be worried about?.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | nick-name1230 -
First Link on Page Still Only Link on Page?
Bruce Clay and others did some research and found that the first link on the page is the most important and what is accredited as the link. Any other links on the page mean nothing. Is this still true? And in that case, on an ecommerce site with category links in the top navigation (which is high on the code), is it not useful to link to categories in the content of the page? Because the category is already linked to on that page. Thank you, Tyler
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | tylerfraser0 -
Why Does Ebay Allow Internal Search Result Pages to be Indexed?
Click this Google query: https://www.google.com/search?q=les+paul+studio Notice how Google has a rich snippet for Ebay saying that it has 229 results for Ebay's internal search result page: http://screencast.com/t/SLpopIvhl69z Notice how Sam Ash's internal search result page also ranks on page 1 of Google. I've always followed the best practice of setting internal search result pages to "noindex." Previously, our company's many Magento eCommerce stores had the internal search result pages set to be "index," and Google indexed over 20,000 internal search result URLs for every single site. I advised that we change these to "noindex," and impressions from Search Queries (reported in Google Webmaster Tools) shot up on 7/24 with the Panda update on that date. Traffic didn't necessarily shoot up...but it appeared that Google liked that we got rid of all this thin/duplicate content and ranked us more (deeper than page 1, however). Even Dr. Pete advises no-indexing internal search results here: http://www.seomoz.org/blog/duplicate-content-in-a-post-panda-world So, why is Google rewarding Ebay and Sam Ash with page 1 rankings for their internal search result pages? Is it their domain authority that lets them get away with it? Could it be that noindexing internal search result pages is NOT best practice? Is the game different for eCommerce sites? Very curious what my fellow professionals think. Thanks,
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | M_D_Golden_Peak
Dan0 -
Any advice on acquiring "jump to" via anchor link text?
Google says these types of references are generated algorithmically and that users should include a table of contents & descriptive anchor link text. Is there anything else we should take into consideration? Also, does anyone know how this works with pagination? Due to the design of our site, we can't make one really long article, but would need to divide it up into several 'pages'--even though it would all live on one URL (we'd use the # for pagination). Thank you in advance for your feedback.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | nicole.healthline1 -
Noindex junk pages with inbound links?
I recently came across what is to me a new SEO problem. A site I consult with has some thin pages with a handful of ads at the top, some relevant local content sourced from a third party beneath that... and a bunch of inbound links to said pages. Not just any links, but links from powerful news sites. My impression is that said links are paid (sidebar links, anchor text... nice number of footprints.) Short version: They may be getting juice from these links. A preliminary lookup for one page's keywords in the title finds it top 100 on Google. I don't want to lose that juice, but do think the thin pages they link to can incur Panda's filter. They've got the same blurb for lots of [topic x] in [city y], plus the sourced content (not original...). So I'm thinking about noindexing said pages to avoid Panda filters. Also, as a future pre-emptive measure, I'm considering figuring out what they did to get these links and aiming to have them removed if they were really paid for. If it was a biz dev deal, I'm open to leaving them up, but that possibility seems unlikely. What would you do? One of the options I laid out above or something else? Why? p.s. I'm asking this on my blog (seoroi.com/blog/ ) too, so if you're up for me to quote you (and link to your site, do say so. You aren't guaranteed to be quoted if you answer here, but it's one of the easier ways you'll get a good quality link. p.p.s. Related note: I'm looking for intermediate to advanced guest posts for my blog, which has 2000+ RSS subs. Email me at gab@ my site if you're interested. You can also PM me here on SEOmoz, though I don't login as frequently.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Gab-Goldenberg0