Can a page be 100% topically relevant to a search query?
-
Today's YouMoz post, Accidental SEO Tests: When On-Page Optimization Ceases to Matter, explores the theory that there is an on-page optimization saturation point, "beyond which further on-page optimization no longer improves your ability to rank" for the keywords/keyword topics you are targeting. In other words, you can optimize your page for search to the point that it is 100% topically relevant to query and intent.
Do you believe there exists such a thing as a page that is 100% topically relevant? What are your thoughts regarding there being an on-page optimization saturation point, beyond which further on-page optimization no longer improves your ability to rank? Let's discuss!
-
I consider 100% match purely as theoretically possible. In my modest opinion the visitor determines the relevancy of the landingpage. And it is Google's nobel job to serve the visitor with a page that fits his needs. But in this case no page can be fully satisfying to everybody, due to different search intentions with the same keyword.
When you achieve a high conversion on your page you'v probably written a very relevant page. So let the visitor truly find what he is looking for and Google will notice....
-
Well said, Russ, especially for a "mathy" answer. I am curious, though, would this "ideal document" you describe have a specific word count?
-
Warning, mathy answer follows. This is a generic description of what is going on, not exact, but hopefully understandable.
Yes, there is some theoretical page that is 100% topically relevant if you had a copy of the "ideal document" produced by the topical relevancy model. This would not look like a real page, though. It would look like a jumble of words in ideal relation and distance to one another. However, most topic models are built using sampling and, more importantly, the comparative documents that are used to determine the confidence level that your document's relevancy is non-random is also sampled. This means that there is some MoE (Margin of Error).
As you and your competitors approach 100% topical relevancy, that Margin of Error likely covers the difference. If you are 99.98% relevant, and they are 99.45% relevant, but the MoE is 1%, then a topical relevancy system cant conclude with certainty that you are more relevant than they are.
At this point, the search model would need to rely on other metrics, like authority, over relevance to differentiate the two pages.
-
With the pace at which things are changing and throwing in machine learning in to the ranking factor, I would say it's close to impossible to have 100% topically relevancy for any good period of time.
-
100% saturation is impossible to achieve while maintaining any semblance of value. Not only because any proper page inherently has navigation, internal linkage, and myriad other elements, but because to write content about a subject in that amount of detail, one would invariably need to write about sub-topics and related topics. It's just not feasible. But, and here's the kicker, you wouldn't want 100% saturation anyway.
Rich, dynamic content incorporates that which is related to it. Strong pages link out to others, and keep visitors within their media cycle, if not churning them lower down. Good content is content that holds information that's both detailed and general to a topic. I would say, at most, the highest saturation point that still remains within strong SEO and content optimization is about 85-90% when taking into account all page content - and even that's pushing it, really.
-
I would agree to a point. At its heart, Google probably uses some form of numerical score for a page as it relates to a query. If a page is a perfect match, it scores 100%. I would also suggest that attaining a perfect score is a virtual impossibility.
The scoring system, however, is dynamic. The page may be perfect for a particular query only at a particular point in time.
- Google's algorithm changes daily. What's perfect today may not be perfect tomorrow.
- Semantic search must be dynamic. If Google discovers a new Proof Term or Relevant Term related to the query, and the page in question doesn't contain that term, the page is no longer perfect.
These are only a couple of examples.
For practical purposes, the amount of testing, research, etc. to achieve a perfect score at some point delivers diminishing returns. The amount of effort required to push a page from 95% to 100% isn't worth the effort, especially since Google's algorithm is a secret.
Sometimes good is good enough.
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
-
If I have an https page with an http img that redirects to an https img, is it still considered by google to be a mixed content page?
With Google starting to crack down on mixed content I was wondering, if I have an https page with an http img that redirects to an https img, is it still considered by Google to be a mixed content page? e.g. In an old blog article, there are images that weren't updated when the blog migrated to https, but just 301ed to new https images. is it still considered a mixed content page?
Algorithm Updates | | David-Stern0 -
Would there be any benefit to creating multiple pages of the same content to target different titles?
Obviously, the duplicated pages would be canonical, but would there be a way of anchoring a page land by search term entry? For example: If you have a site that sells cars you could use this method but have a page that has (brand) cars for sale, finance options, best car for a family, how far will the (brand) car go for on a full tank and so on? Then making all the information blocks h2's but using the same H2s for the duplicated page titles. Then it gets complicated, If someone searches "best car for a family" and the page title for the duplicated page is clicked how would you anchor this user to the section of the page with this information? Could there be a benefit to doing this or would it just not work?
Algorithm Updates | | Evosite10 -
Do keyword target landing pages increase rankings?
Let's say we create landing pages for targeted keywords in our niche. So like we have landing pages optimised for 80% of the top keywords with decent search volume. If these pages started ranking at first page or around; will this scenario improves the ranking of website? Right now, only few of our top pages are ranking good. Planning to create more of such.
Algorithm Updates | | vtmoz0 -
Do pages with canonicals need meta data?
Page A has a canonical to Page B. Should Page A have meta data values such as description, keywords, dublin core values, etc.? If yes, should the meta data values be different on Page A and Page B?
Algorithm Updates | | Shirley.Fenlason1 -
We are being penalized for one specific key word (and phrases it appears in), how can we figure out why?
Overall our SEO efforts have worked well, slow and steady increases in rankings across the board for all products and categories, EXCEPT for one particular brand name. Key words and phrases for that brand consistently under perform all other key words and phrases. Strategies etc. are the same, and we have not received any notifications about 'manual action' but I'm convinced there is something affecting our ranking on that brand. This has been going on for approximately two years, prior to that we ranked very well for this brand. What sorts of tests can I run to try and find the problem?
Algorithm Updates | | absoauto0 -
Duplicate pages in language versions, noindex in sitemap and canonical URLs in sitemap?
Hi SEO experts! We are currently in the midst of reducing our amount of duplicate titles in order to optimize our SEO efforts. A lot of the "duplicate titles" come from having several language versions of our site. Therefore, I am wondering: 1. If we start using "" to make Google (and others) aware of alternative language versions of a given site/URL, how big a problem will "duplicate titles" then be across our domains/site versions? 2. Is it a problem that we in our sitemap include (many) URL's to pages that are marked with noindex? 3. Are there any problems with having a sitemap that includes pages that includes canonical URL's to other pages? Thanks in advance!
Algorithm Updates | | TradingFloor.com0 -
How often do people use Google Product Search
I was was reading Tom Critchlow's excellent blog on how to rank well for Google Product Search. I'm trying to find out if there are stats on how often people use this feature in Google (since it is not listed on Google's main navigation). I'm working with a customer who has b-2-b products and am trying to determine the value of adjusting his ecommerce pages to appear on Google Product Search.
Algorithm Updates | | EricVallee340 -
Using Brand Name in Page titles
Is it a good practice to append our brand name at the end of every page title? We have a very strong brand name but it is also long. Right now what we are doing is saying: Product Name | Long brand name here Product Category | Long brand name here Is this the right way to do it or should we just be going with ONLY the product and category names in our page titles? Right now we often exceed the 70 character recommendation limit.
Algorithm Updates | | mlentner1