Organic search traffic down 60% since 8/1/18\. What now?
-
I have a small health & fitness blog, and my Google search traffic suddenly dropped 60% around August 1 (I've attempted to link an image). My rank has dropped for 86 keywords. I have no manual penalty, so I'm guessing I was affected by the algorithm change.
My technical skills are VERY limited. I've tried to find answers on my own, but every time I try to "fix" something, I only seem to make it worse. I do seem to have some structural/performance issues with my site (e.g., lots of 404 errors from uninstalled plugins and unwanted permalinks). I asked my server for assistance (I used managed Wordpress hosting), and they said they couldn't help.
As you can imagine, this is quite devastating, and I have no clue where to go from here. I don't know if I'm allowed to link to my site here, but it's mommyrunsit dot com. Any assistance is greatly appreciated. Thanks.
Sharon
-
how to check spamming backlinks for website light motion APK
-
If your organic traffic substantially decreases, this could be because of an algorithm update or because the business is possibly incurring a manual or an algorithm penalty?
-
Yes, same happened to my websites https://www.healthpaper.org and https://www.scienceworld.in. these site are in Hindi language. I need to know how to recover and grow web traffic.
-
Unfortunately, I think the "not a penalty" line is sometimes a bit of a cop-out on Google's part -- anything that moves a bunch of sites up, is naturally going to move a bunch of other sites down. Even if those sites have technically done nothing wrong, it sure feels like to them like they're being penalized. I also don't like that Google claims they're rewarding good behavior, but then won't really tell us what that good behavior is. If it's genuinely good behavior, give us some guidelines (we're not asking for chunks of code from the algorithm).
I'm comparing a case right now where there are two sites in the same industry, both seem decent, but one got a huge boost on 8/1 and one took a big hit. Hoping to glean some insights, but there's just a ton of speculation at the moment.
-
Dr. Meyers,
Thank you so much for your response. It is tremendously helpful, and I appreciate the actionable items that I can address right away. I am trying not to freak out, but honestly a 60% drop in organic traffic is devastating to a small site like mine,
You may find this helpful as you collect data: I've been studying my ranking for various search terms.. One post in particular has been on page 1 of Google for 3.5 years, and it dropped down to around #10+ overnight. Some of the posts that have replaced mine in the top spots were written by bloggers who I know, all of whom are comparable to me in style and reach, and none of whom are either more or less authoritative than me. Their posts have been there all along but just ranked lower than mine.
I've heard the theory that Google is not necessarily penalizing content, but rather they are giving a boost to deserving content that has previously been unrecognized. This makes sense, but it also kind of stinks.
Thanks again for your help. I'll keep my eye out for new info about the algo update.
Sharon
-
I've studied the August 1st update as much or more than most, and let me first be brutally honest and say that we're still at a pretty early stage of speculation. Until we have clear recovery cases, we're all just trying to tell a story from the anecdotal data. There are a lot of plausible theories, but we can't give you clear answers other than to confirm that the update was large and the health and fitness vertical definitely seemed to be disproportionately impacted.
The E-A-T theory is plausible, from what I've seen, but it leaves a lot left to be explained. We don't know what signals Google uses for Expertise/Authority/Trust -- are they on-page signals, link-based signals, citation-based signals... ? Probably a combination, and some of those are a lot easier to control than others.
Looking briefly at your site, here's what I might try if I were you. Again, this is educated guesswork at best:
(1) Your author name links go to pages that show all articles by that author. I know this is a common practice, but I would consider linking those to a full bio page for each author, with credentials. The on-page E-A-T signals probably aren't the whole picture Google uses, but they're the easiest to control. Currently, these pages also lead to more, similar pages (page 2, 3, etc.), which could look thin, but your rel=prev/next tags seem to be properly formatted. I'm more concerned that Google isn't seeing any information about the authors on those immediately linked author pages (other than a very short blurb).
(2) I know this can be a dicey issue online (especially if you're trying to protect anonymity to some degree), but I'd strongly recommend using your full name, properly capitalized. The use of just "sharon," "victor," etc. could make it harder for Google to connect you to third-party mentions and citations, unless those sites link directly to your bio pages. I strongly suspect Gogole is using some link/citation signals to establish E-A-T. it's a bit like having a consistent business name and address in local search -- you need to make it easy for Google to connect your name to mentions of you.
You do have some odd links to your site that almost look like they're tied to a link network, but I'm having trouble finding some of them manually (they're coming up in Link Explorer reports). If you've got any link profile problems, I'd consider cleaning those up ASAP. If Google is pushing hard and require more proof of expertise in your link profile, that's going to be a lot harder battle. There's no easy fix for that, other than continuing to try to build credibility. Again, I think the full-name issue might help here, but it's only one small piece of the puzzle.
Sorry you've been affected by this -- we're seeing a lot of small health/fitness blogs getting hit, and many seem to be decent quality, independent blogs by well-meaning people.
-
Thanks, GR. I'm trying not to despair, but ugh. I'll read those posts - thanks so much.
Sharon
-
Hi Roni,
sorry to hear that you were hit by this god damn update.Im writing to send you good wishes and hope. Also to sum up and add two other studies about the algorithm. Read them full and try to understand what's the issue in your site:
Analysis and Findings From The August 1, 2018 Google Algorithm Update – A Massive Core Ranking Update - GSQi
Google's August 1st Core Update: Week 1 - Moz Blog
Google’s August algorithm update strengthens as roll-out continues - Sistrix
The August 1, 2018 Google Update strongly affected YMYL sites - Marie HaynesBest luck!
GR -
Thank you so much. I'll read those articles and see if I can figure anything out.
I would appreciate any suggestions. My site is https://www.mommyrunsit.com/
Sharon
-
Hello, Sharon,
I'm so sorry to hear your blog was strongly affected by the August 1st update. From what I've read, health/fitness is one of the categories which has been most obviously impacted.
We are still in the early days of speculating about which signals Google is focusing on.
Here is Dr. Pete's post detailing what Moz has seen happen with this update:
https://moz.com/blog/googles-august-1st-core-update-week-1
Marie Haynes also wrote a blog post offering a theory that Google's focus may be E-A-T signals (expertise, authoritativeness, and trust), which I recommend that you read if you haven't already, bearing in mind, of course, that this is only a theory: https://www.mariehaynes.com/the-august-1-2018-google-update-strongly-affected-ymyl-sites/ She offers some suggestions for things you might analyze and attempt for your website.
I hope these at least offer some information, and if you wish to share your domain name here, perhaps our community can make some specific suggestions even though no one but some folks at Google can be totally sure what was targeted and how a site can attempt to recover.
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
-
Search Console API script aggregating over date range
Hi I was recently reading this article https://moz.com/blog/how-to-get-search-console-data-api-python and found it really helpful to get started with the search console API. However, it makes note that it is designed to return data for each day individually in a date range. I don't know python very well and was wondering if anyone knew how to edit the script to aggregate over the given date range for each url in a list of urls.
Reporting & Analytics | | aranzato0 -
Search Console Crawl Errors/Not Found - Strange URLs
Hello, In Google Search Console under Crawl > Crawl Errors > Not found I have strange URLs like the following: https://www.domain.com//UbaOZ/
Reporting & Analytics | | chuck-layton
https://www.domain.com//UPhXZ/
https://www.domain.com//KaUpZ/WYdhZ/SnQZZ/MOcUZ/ There is no info in Linked From tab. Have you seen this type of error??
Does anyone know whats causing it??
How should it be fixed?? Thanks for reading and the help!0 -
Email traffic tracking in Google Analytics
Hello! I have a question about how to assure email traffic is properly tracked in GA > Acquisition > All Traffic > Channels. **First, some background... ** Our company (Wisconsin's largest group dental practice) is about to revamp the way we try to re-capture patients who don't have a future appointment set with us. Part of that process will include emails. Those emails will point back to our website to request an appointment. Now to the question... Is there anything special we should do to assure that links coming to the website and the resulting appointment request goal conversions track appropriately and appear under "Email" in the Default Channel Group of Analytics > Acquisition > All Traffic > Channels area of GA? For example, should we use Campaign URL Builder to establish UTM links? Thanks in advance for any feedback. Erik
Reporting & Analytics | | SmileMoreSEO0 -
Spam Direct Traffic
Hello, Lately, I have been receiving a big amount of unexpected direct traffic from Boston. After analyzing with Analytivs, this is what I get (please, check attachment). Normally I would be blocking this traffic source straight away from my Google Analytics account, and also blocking this traffic from accesing my servers, but check out the analytic metrics: this traffic represents 12% of my total traffic right now!!! av. session duration is 4:53 !! bounce rate is 72% !!!! pages/session 1.44 !! Service provider is "Microsoft Corporation" who looks like one of the typical spammy service providers. My question is, is this a bot?? what do you think ? Thanks, Luis zUlVHIi
Reporting & Analytics | | Yeeply.com1 -
New GSC Search Analytics report: position mixes web and image
Dear all, I am auditing a site in Google Seach Console (GSC, formerly Google Webmaster Tools) and find the Position data in the new Search Analytics report very, very improbable. I suspect that even if you filter by "SearchType = web", the Position data does count the ranking of images in the Image search widget as a search position. Has anybody observed this as well? Here is the case: the site targets a quite broad search query in the bath room domain. I have made a number of searches with private browser sessions, different browsers, alternative IP address via a VPN, etc, and the look of the search result in the relevant geographical market is consistently the following. Three Adwords ads #1 organic result Images universal results widget #2-10 organic results The site’s first page ranks consistently around #15 of the organic results, hence on the second SERP. But it also consistently has an image in the Images universal results widget (usually #2 or #3). This is consistent with the data I have in Moz Analytics. Yet, the GSC Search Analytics report shows 2.2 as average position with the default SearchType=Web setting. I have done the search over and over, and never has a PAGE of the site ranked that high. Is there any public information how exactly the position is calculated? I mean, something more precise than the very general information on https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/6155685?hl=en Is there any way to get the correct position/ranking? Thanks for sharing your experience!
Reporting & Analytics | | QRN0 -
How to Configure Custom Alerts for Real Time Traffic etc from Google Analytic API?
Hi All, I know how to set alert from google analytic but i want alerts for real time visitors so i think it is possible via Google Analytic API, so can anyone share with me the process or relevant blog post? Regards, Mit
Reporting & Analytics | | mit0 -
How much direct traffic is really direct?
Does anyone else think that a large chunk of traffic labelled as "Direct" in your analytics isn't direct at all. When you analyse traffic trends it seems that a large percentage could just be browsers with their referring URL hidden so it only appears direct. Here's the evidence: When we've been affected by major search algorithm changes, we've seen big changes in direct traffic as well as organic, but not in referral traffic. If direct traffic is just bookmarks, typed-in URLs, and people clicking through from emails why is direct traffic 85% new visitors? We don't do any offline advertising, so you'd expect genuine direct traffic to be returning visitors -- either our brand loyalists or subscribers to our email newsletters. If you segment direct traffic into new and returning visitors and look at a major algo update as discussed in 1), you find all the drop in direct traffic is from New Direct visitors, with no drop at all in Returning Direct visitors. Can anyone explain who these New, Direct visitors are if not simply mislabelled new, search visitors. Cookie deletion can't be the problem (ie: they can't be Returning, Direct really) because the traffic doesn't behave like returning, direct (that is, it varies too much). I'd be really interest to hear theories, and whether anyone has any figures on the extent of HTTP referrer blocking.
Reporting & Analytics | | Dennis-529610