"WWW." versus Non - "www."
-
Our web developer recently changed our preferred domain from "www.thinkbiglearnsmart.com" to "thinkbiglearnsmart.com" so when I check the authority of the "www." it is higher than the "thinkbiglearnsmart.com." do you have any insight onto if we should just make our preferred URL "www." because that's how it was for years? Is there a way just to merge the two back together so it is not sort of having different information for the same site?
Thank you!
-
Thank you so much!
I am contacting my developer about this!
-
Looking at OSE for that domain, both sites have links pointing to them. So a preferred version should be chosen, and as Dana suggested, a 301 put in place. Since G+ 1s were also considered a ranking factor in Moz's latest update, I would take that into account as well, but interestingly enough it looks like +1s are appropriately applied regardless of the www version.
You don't have a large amount of links or authority built up yet, so ultimately it will not make a huge difference which one you choose, but it is important to stick with one and ensure the other is 301'd appropriately. The non-www has more links, but the www has more links from different domains - so if you did make a choice I would choose the www to get the authority from more linking domains.
The www has slightly higher page authority as well.
www version:
Page Authortity: 35
Linking domains: 12
Total Links 22
G+ 1s: 36
Non WWW Version
Page Authority: 27
Domain Authority: 25
Linking Domains 4
Total Links 164
Google +1s: 36
In response to your WMT question, preferred domain settings are now in the top right hand corner as an option under the gear icon under "site settings"
-
Hi there - it is to the right at the top next to "help" under settings - It's called site settings!
-
Thanks so much Dana!
-
I don't see the set preferred url section in webmasters tool anymore.. any hint on that as well?
-
Yes, in my opinion you should change it back to the "www." version and set that as your preferred version in Google Webmaster Tools. Also, make sure you have your developer 301-redirect the non-www version to your "www." version. This will unify your domain authority, which it appears has been fragmented by the two co-existing. You want to give preference to the one with the strongest authority. In this case it sounds like the "www." version is the way to go.
Something else to keep in mind is to have consistency in the way you are linking. If "www." is your preferred, then make sure that you are using that version when requesting backlinks, leaving comments on a blog or even creating print pieces (i.e. business cards). It will encourage other people linking to you to use the preferred version.
Hope that helps!
Dana
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
-
Need help fixing a duplicate content issue for my website. The moz crawl is show OMG my website with https:// and https://www. But I have never used the url https:// so I don’t understand why moz is showing this
Moz is showing my url with two different starts. Https:// and then the one I use https://www. The problem is I don’t think I have ever used the url without the www. at the start. How do I fix this?
Moz Bar | | jdp_uk0 -
"New" issues not previously found being shown?
I'm not sure what logic Moz is using for its reporting of Site Crawl issues, but it appears to be pretty flawed (unless I'm missing something, which is possible). I've got a client site that has been in Moz for about 6 months now. Every time the crawler runs, the same number of pages are reported as having been crawled. However I'm consistently getting "New Issues" reported that should have been reported during previous crawls. Example: A redirect chain was reported several month ago. The referring URL was the homepage of the website, and we tracked it down to an old link in the header. This was fixed, marked as resolved, and the issue was not shown on the next crawl. Several weeks later, the same issue was reported for a different page on the website - a page which has existed since 2014 and was already crawled many times. Again, we fixed. Fast-forward to the report that just ran on 12/1 and we have the same issue reported, for a different page, which has also existed for years and has been previously crawled. It's very hard to explain to a client "this item you are seeing has been resolved", only to have it continually crop back up in future reports. Note this is not limited to redirect chains - that's just an example. I'm seeing this for other items such as missing canonicals, duplicate titles, etc.
Moz Bar | | RucksackDigital0 -
Www and non www / duplicate content / redirects / www resolve issue
I am not getting docked for these specific errors, but I am getting docked for 1 page has a WWW resolve issue and 1 wrong URL in the sitemap... (SEM Rush) but when I use moz, it's not showing any issues. So I have these things set up so far: In .htaccess i have a command that removes the www. 301 redirect from www version to the non www (homepage) canonical on index.html pointing to non www version, I also set up a canonical tag for each page on the site search console with non www, www, https www, https non www all set to non www preference. Also, when I fetch the www version in google search console it says it's being 301 redirected to non www version which is basically what I want.Is there anything that i'm missing? These errors on SEM Rush are giving me anxiety lol.
Moz Bar | | donnieath1 -
Do exact keyword matches exclude "in", "based" etc?
I am trying to build a landing page for the search term "web design london" and I have included this search term as well as some variations such as "web design in london", "web design based in london" as the content doesn't really read well if I don't put in a connector word (I can't remember what the term for the use of "in" etc is). However I am using the Moz On-Page Grader to make sure I'm dotting every i and crossing every t, but it doesn't seem to pick up on the search term when "in" or "based" is used. Now is this a limitation of the On-Page Grader or should I expect Google and other search engines to not pick up on the search term when it contains these sorts of words?
Moz Bar | | mickburkesnr0 -
Unusual "internal links" causing SEO issues?
Hi all, I'm working on an ecommerce site which has been around for almost 20 years. Over the years it has started to suffer in Google's search results and the decision was recently made to completely overhaul the site. We're now very happy with the website's design, and care was taken to maintain page rank via 301s, etc. However, the site has just fallen off the bottom of Google's first search result page (for the first time in years) for our main keyword. I signed up here in the hope of using Moz's SEO tools to help us return to our former glory, but I'm seeing some confusing results: I've run a crawl test on our site, as well as on our two biggest competitors. One thing that really stood out was that we have over 1000 "internal links" to our homepage, whereas our competitors both have around 20-30 (both of which appear at the top of the first SR page). Since the rest of the "on-page SEO" looks OK, I suspect that this could be causing our problems, but I don't understand where this "internal links" number is coming from. Links to our competitor's homepage appear in the navigation bar on every single one of their product pages (which they have about 500 of), yet your report only claims that they have 30 links. The only link to the homepage appears in the site's main navigation bar (which obviously appears on every product page - exactly as it does on our competitors' sites). Additionally, almost every other page on our site apparently has 0 "internal links" and 0 page authority. Is this a problem with Moz's crawl test tool, or is our site actually at fault? The above has been asked directly to Moz staff, but I haven't had a reply. I'd hugely appreciate any words of wisdom from the community. Many thanks in advance. Nick
Moz Bar | | nick45010 -
How does the grader tool treat keyword "stuffing" in ecommerce
We recently started using Moz on our ecommmerce site because I'm concerned that our SEO company doesn't really know what they are doing and I want to see what I can do on my own with the little bit of knowledge I have. It's helping in a number of ways but here's a big question mark: The Grader Tool keeps telling us that our product category pages have too many keywords on them. We are only using them in the content once or twice, but the sub-category buttons on the page show the category + sub repeated. Could this be what's causing it? Does Google distinguish this for ecommerce? We've taken a huge hit in rankings for key phrases and keywords over the past six months and I'm wondering if this is part of it?
Moz Bar | | Creative-Web-Stores0 -
Clarify "broad keyword usage in page title"
Hello Page grader has two different grades for page title that I want clarification on. There is "Broad Keyword Usage in Page Title" and "Exact Keyword Usage in Page Title". Googling around about and searching here I have found that "broad" seems to mean the keywords should be used throughout the page, rather than just in the title and header. Which makes sense as this is a kind of check to ensure the page IS about the keywords and not something unrelated. But what is meant by "broad" usage in the page title? This refers specifically to the page title and not the whole document. My best guess got me to this, given the keyword "Visit London Today"; "Come and visit London today" - exact match only "London - visit today" - broad match only "Visit London the city of dreams | visit London today" - matches both That could be complete nonsense, but basically is broad usage the use of keywords scattered in the page title? Thanks.
Moz Bar | | yolkcreative0 -
"Avoid Keyword Self-Cannibalization" - can't find the problem
Hi, I understand what this means (or at least I think I do!), but I can't find where the problem lies. The keyword is "fire warden training" and the url is http://www.tutis-fire.co.uk/fire-warden-training-courses/ If anyone could lend a helping hand, I'd appreciate it.
Moz Bar | | Gordon_Hall0