Am I losing link juice with 302-redirected faceted navigation?
-
My site has faceted navigation that allows shoppers to filter category page results by things brand, size, price range, etc. These pages 302 redirect to the same page they came from, which already include canonical meta tags. I added the rel="nofollow" attribute to the facet links and added the line "Disallow: /category_filter/" to robots.txt.
One of our SEO consultants told me that this is likely diluting the potency of the page's link juice since they are divided among all the page's links, including the links I am instructing crawlers to disregard.
Can anybody tell me whether I am following the best practices for links that redirect to the same page?
-
I considered this but our shopping cart software is has a lot of "black box" features including this one, so I have no control over how this feature is handled. Also, we use SLI search with site champion, which does a very similar auto-generated landing page function for category facets so including this function again would be redundant and possibly dilute our indexed results.
-
Why are you 302 redirecting in the first place? Doesn't make much sense to me.
Why aren't your filter links simple hyperlinks?
The correct way to do this would be:
- Set urlrewrite's that match your filter expressions (e.g. /category1/brand, or /category3/xxl)
- In your category results page have hyperlinks that point at the rewritten urls (you build these dynamically)
This will avoid 302's completely and stop any redirects.
An alternative to this would be to server side filtering of data on page postback and avoid redirects this way.
I'm not sure how correct your SEO consultant is about the link juice being divided amongst all links inlcuding those that are nofollowed. My understanding is that if it is nofollowed, the search engine essentially ignores it.
-
It sounds to me that you are in the clear. The use of the canonical tag would prevent pagerank dispersion, the use of the nofollow tag would as well, and the robots.txt file should prevent the spidering of those pages. Is google indexing any of the category filter pages?
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
-
Crawl Budget and Faceted Navigation
Hi, we have an ecommerce website with facetted navigation for the various options available. Google has 3.4 million webpages indexed. Many of which are over 90% duplicates. Due to the low domain authority (15/100) Google is only crawling around 4,500 webpages per day, which we would like to improve/increase. We know, in order not to waste crawl budget we should use the robots.txt to disallow parameter URL’s (i.e. ?option=, ?search= etc..). This makes sense as it would resolve many of the duplicate content issues and force Google to only crawl the main category, product pages etc. However, having looked at the Google Search Console these pages are getting a significant amount of organic traffic on a monthly basis. Is it worth disallowing these parameter URL’s in robots.txt, and hoping that this solves our crawl budget issues, thus helping to index and rank the most important webpages in less time. Or is there a better solution? Many thanks in advance. Lee.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Webpresence0 -
Redirect Chains
Hi There, I have had conducted a few migrations recently and have a common issue which is this: HTTP (old site) -> HTTPS (old site) -> (HTTPS) (new site) Which causes a redirect chain. How should you prevent this before migration or fix it after migration? Cheers.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | kayl870 -
How i get link to my website
hi i'm very new in seo want to have links to my website:www.warningbroker.com how i can get links to my website?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | marketing660 -
Disavow Links & Paid Link Removal (discussion)
Hey everyone, We've been talking about this issue a bit over the last week in our office, I wanted to extend the idea out to the Moz community and see if anyone has some additional perspective on the issue. Let me break-down the scenario: We're in the process of cleaning-up the link profile for a new client, which contains many low quality SEO-directory links placed by a previous vendor. Recently, we made a connection to a webmaster who controls a huge directory network. This person found 100+ links to our client's site on their network and wants $5/link to have them removed. Client was not hit with a manual penalty, this clean-up could be considered proactive, but an algorithmic 'penalty' is suspected based on historical keyword rankings. **The Issue: **We can pay this ninja $800+ to have him/her remove the links from his directory network, and hope it does the trick. When talking about scaling this tactic, we run into some ridiculously high numbers when you talk about providing this service to multiple clients. **The Silver Lining: **Disavow Links file. I'm curious what the effectiveness of creating this around the 100+ directory links could be, especially since the client hasn't been slapped with a manual penalty. The Debate: Is putting a disavow file together a better alternative to paying for crappy links to be removed? Are we actually solving the bad link problem by disavowing or just patching it? Would choosing not to pay ridiculous fees and submitting a disavow file for these links be considered a "good faith effort" in Google's eyes (especially considering there has been no manual penalty assessed)?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Etna0 -
Link Juice + multiple links pointing to the same page
Scenario
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Mark_Ch
The website has a menu consisting of 4 links Home | Shoes | About Us | Contact Us Additionally within the body content we write about various shoe types. We create a link with the anchor text "Shoes" pointing to www.mydomain.co.uk/shoes In this simple example, we have 2 instances of the same link pointing to the same url location.
We have 4 unique links.
In total we have 5 on page links. Question
How many links would Google count as part of the link juice model?
How would the link juice be weighted in terms of percentages?
If changing the anchor text in the body content to say "fashion shoes" have a different impact? Any other advise or best practice would be appreciated. Thanks Mark0 -
Links how long do they show?
How long do links show for in software such as Majestic ect once the link has been removed.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | BobAnderson0 -
Link Building
We have just recently launched a new website in Australia and as l am new to the SEO community, l was looking for a little advice on link building. Where is best to start? There are not many authorative websites for our industry. Are there specific websites that are good to link to? Are there any good tools to assist with this? Any help would be great. Thank you.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | RobSchofield0 -
Site Navigation
Hi Mozzers, I am an SEO at uncommongoods.com and looking for your opinion on our site nav. Currently our nav & URLs are structured in 3 levels. From the top level down, they are: 1. Category ex: http://www.uncommongoods.com/home-garden 2. Subcat ex: http://www.uncommongoods.com/home-garden/bed-bath 3. Family ex:http://www.uncommongoods.com/home-garden/bed-bath/bath-accessories Right now, all levels are accessible from our top nav but we are considering removing the family pages. If we did that, Google could still find & crawl links to the family pages, but they would have to drill down to the subcat pages to find them. Do you guys think this would help or hurt our SEO efforts? Thanks! -Zack
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | znotes0