Can't Grasp Why Pages rank Higher?
-
The first result
"Bankruptcy on IRS" is the search term.
Why does the first url rank higher in google. The second one, the IRS.gov page beats them in PA, DA root domains links. The title meta has bankruptcy near the front. unclefed does have the IRS keyword in the title, but an I missing something here?
What are the other factors, that are most obvious.
Sure one can have bad links, and other negative criteria, but these are pretty decent sites that probably don't engage in much in seo, let alone bad SEO. Sure link text and mix of links can help, but am I missing something here?
Actually what I think I really need IS A CHECKLIST OF WHAT TO CHECK IN WHAT ORDER WHEN COMPARING WHY ONE PAGE RANKS BETTER THAN ANOTHER. Appreciate all discussions. Thanks in advance.
http://www.unclefed.com/AuthorsRow/Daily/Fwdcsea.html
http://www.irs.gov/businesses/small/article/0,,id=98701,00.html
-
.edu sites and .gov sites are not necessarily more valued due to the extension, but rather the relevance they have to people looking for their specific content. More people looking for what a particular .edu or .gov site offers will go than random people stumbling around for the kind of info a .com site might offer. Not always, but generally speaking, that's an important concept.
Som of those people, in turn, tend to spend more time on those sites than people do on commercial sites.
Of course, this is only true of high quality .edu or .gov sites, not all just because they've got the TLD. That's why .edu and .gov sites aren't necessarily given automatic higher value for having the TLD. They do have to earn it.
-
Thanks again. 2 things.
1. I thought I read on googles site or matt's page that edu and gov dosn't pass any extra rank because of the extension. In general they may be better but not because of the extension.
'The more links coming from each domain, the weaker the trust factor." I wasn't aware of that. I have some key pages on my site that have a lot of links , like 100's from the same social site. Should I make attempts to remove them? are they hurting my sites ranking?
-
One thing stands out to me. Link to Root Ratio. UncleFed's got an average of 2.17 link for each root domain pointing to it. The IRS's ratio is 5.14 links for each domain. That's more domains pointing fewer links each. The more links coming from each domain, the weaker the trust factor. Sure, it may seem like a minor difference. It's not like sites are sending 40 or 400 links to the IRS site.
Yet again, as in the other factors, it does count. And head to head, it's a 2&1/2 times more refined profile.
Another consideration - among the highest quality sites that link to UncleFed, there are more .edu and more .gov links than compared to the IRS's top link sources.
So again, when looking at the total link profile of each, there's a higher ratio of non-commercial sites in the mix overall than compared to the IRS site.
So as in all the other issues mentioned, it's a David Vs. Goliath thing.
-
google works in mysterious ways.
-
Thanks for clearing that up. However if you can explain a bit further, so i can understand, how is unclefed's inbound linking more refined? I'm not seeing it. It will help me keep mine more "refined" if needed. My site's an excellent example where tens of thousands of links didn't make much difference.Starting to rank much better now, and expect to keep ranking better with the help of SEOMOZ tools and forum.
-
I appreciate the insight. I was getting caught up in the technical parts, and forgetting the rest. I just ran report carts on both pages. Unclefed got a D, and the IRS got an F. So on the report card I can also see the things you bring up. great help!
-
I agree with Alan. There is no mix up.
IRS is the larger site. You feel that because they are the larger site, their page should rank first.
Unclefed is decent sized, but they are nothing compared to the IRS site.
Why does the first url rank higher in google. The second one, the IRS.gov page beats them in PA, DA root domains links.
The first url, the one belonging to unclefed, ranks higher because it is the better article for the search term. The domain rank is one important factor in the overall Google calculation, but so are the other factors mentioned.
-
Great focused reasoning Ryan. A clear case where refined topical focus wins out over competitor size and perceived authority. It's all about matching the search intent. Which shows Google doesn't always get it wrong
-
Actually I don't have them mixed up.
Having authority for an entire site, and having a larger site itself are not always the issue. It's specific search ranking factors for a specific search. This is why it's deceiving to rely on ranking data from any tool, which should always only be used as a general guide.
The refined focus of a particular topic as evaluated by the several Google algorithms is what counts. And this is where my evaluation was focused.
If I've got less pages, but the SEO for them is even a little better than that of a much bigger site, and if the inbound link profile is even a little more refined than for a site with vastly larger inbound link counts, I can definitely outrank the larger site.
Think of it this way. Goliath gets lots of points because he's so big. He gets lots of points because a lot of people think he'll win, so they root for him.
David comes along, and with refined skills in combat, he's able to overcome Goliath's perceived advantages. So to it goes sometimes in SEO.
-
Take a look at both the pages involved.
The unclefed page is a very nice, long article with a lot of content. It has the term "bankruptcy on the IRS" in the content. That is about as close to an exact match as you can hope for with that phrase. The page also has the terms bankruptcy and IRS in the title.
The IRS page is very weak. The page does not mention "IRS" even once in the content, although it is mentioned in the URL and sidebar. The IRS page has less then 10% of the content when compared to the unclefed page.
It is a very good thing the unclefed page ranks higher on this particular search, as it should. It is a well organized page written by someone with authority and great subject knowledge. Furthermore, there doesn't seem to be any apparent effort from the IRS towards SEO at all. There isn't even a meta description for their page.
Bottom line, you are asking to investigate the lesser factors while ignoring the big one. CONTENT IS KING. It doesn't always work out that way, but it should. It did in this case. No reason to look any further.
-
I might be wrong, but I think you have the two mixed up. Unclefed ranks first. The second one (irs.gov) has much more authority, and is the larger site.
-
My quick hit take is it's just the right kind of authority. 70,000 page site. As for links, even though there's hardly any, it's a very tight link to root domain ratio. Many of those are from very authoritative sites including .edu (not junk edu links, but real, valid links).
Of course, without a comprehensive audit, that's just an assumption, though it's pretty strong. And shows the power of focusing on quality SEO vs. junk SEO.
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
-
Why are they ranking?
Hi I've been looking at domains which rank well for a particular search term - plastic storage boxes to try and see why they rank. http://www.poundstretcher.co.uk/home-furniture/storage-organisation/plastic-storage ranks particularly well. From what I can see, they have about 6 backlinks, 28 DA, and 11 PA - which isn't that high compared to others ranking on the first page. I can't work out why they rank so highly, they also rank for over 100 other storage terms for this page. Am I looking in the wrong place?
Competitive Research | | BeckyKey0 -
Site Ranking for keywords that they haven't targeted in content
There is a site that I am constantly battling for the #1 spot for a particular keyword and I can't see that they are doing any link building, they are not using any anchor text for the keyword "at all" just their company name (not exact match) and their content doesn't even contain the keyword. I used Open site explorer to analyze their activity, but they are doing something I can't figure out from that data. Any other tools to use? I have higher quality links than them, post content nearly 5 times per week to my blog and their blog hasn't been updated in ages, I kill them in social media, there isn't one instance that they are better than my site and I only build quality driven links, no blog comment crap and get featured on lots of industry blogs for our work. I distribute my content very effectively, I just can't figure it out. They were no where about 5 months ago now they are tearing it up for lots of keywords in the industry top spots. I can build a few links and surpass them, but I have to do it every week or so and I think they are doing something fishy. I just want to figure out what they are doing and bury them. I don't want to post their url and mine here as I don't want them to see this post in search results.
Competitive Research | | photoseo10 -
Ranking better with worse figures
Six months ago a competitor e-commerce site appeared in the top 10. Now six months later he is at #2. (for the main keyword in my sector in Dutch language, competition +4 million) My site is 4 years old and since three years ranks at #1 or 2. I'm now at #3, behind the competitors site. My competitor has a HomePage PA of 36 with 2295 links from 26 domains, root domain DA 23 with 175000 links from 30 domains. My site has a HomePage PA of 49 with 6975 links froms 238 domains, root domain DA 40 with 310023 links from 269 domains. I have more specific landing pages, better and more content, code W3C checked .... Can somebody explain why a younger site with worse figures gets a better position in Google ranking?
Competitive Research | | noordhout0 -
Confused about sites ranking when compared to each other
I'm looking at the keyword "snow guards" for two competitor websites: snogem dot com (SG) snoshield dot com (SS) I've been watching these two for about 4 months. SG stays in the top 5 SERPs consistently, while SS bounces around from 15-20 on Google. I've looked at the competitive link comparison and SS appears to have a much better link profile when it comes to DA. Page specific metrics in OSE show SS with a higher mozrank, moztrust, internal followed links, linking root domains, total linking root domains, and linking C Blocks. It appears to me that SG has many more links, but their links seem to be many site wide exact match keyword links, and paid for advertisements on a major site in the metal roofing industry. Honestly the linking profile of SG surprises me that they rank so much higher than SS after the Panda/Penguin updates. I have two questions: 1. When competing against these sites, should I model SG's link profile? I'm nervous to because of my previous statement thinking they will get hit with Panda/Penguin like updates. 2. What would it take to bounce SS to competing with SG on the first page? Is the number of links the only thing this site is missing, or is there something else to focus on.
Competitive Research | | kadesmith0 -
Tool for finding what keywords a competitor ranks for?
Does anyone know of any good tools that display what keywords a competitor ranks for? I have many competitors that I know get a lot of traffic, but I'm not entirely sure where the traffic comes from so it would be nice to plug in their url and get a general overview of what keywords they rank for and what positions.
Competitive Research | | shawn810 -
Analyzing Back Links - Says site A has back link to Site B but when I look at site B I can't find any back link to Site A. Why?
I am new to SEO Moz - It looks like incredible technology. I was playing around with different websites to see where they had back linked to see how it works. Looked at a site called racingsecretsexposed [dot] come and it said that it had dozens of links to www.ndesignstudio.com such as: ndesign-studio.com/blog/best-wordpress-sites?replytocom=893 with link anchor text "laying horses" but when I do a search for the company name, or the anchor text "laying horses", or the owner of the company's name on ndesignstudio.com - nothing appears. Why not? Isn't the back link anchored by the text laying horses, which should link back to the racing secrets website? Thanks
Competitive Research | | NewtoSEO900 -
How can a site rank higher when you beat them by A LOT on virtually every SEOMOZ factor?
Any insight into what's driving these results would be appreciated. Another site ranks #6 and we rank #22 on a keyword that scores 67% for "Keyword Difficulty", but we score significantly higher than them on almost every ranking factor including having nearly 10 times more backlinks along with higher PA and DA scores,etc. Here is a comparison from the Keyword Difficulty Tool report. Question: What could be going on? Factor and ranking comparison (us v. them) with our higher rankings are listed first. PA: 61 v. 39, mozRank 5,85 v. 4,54, mozTrust 6.00 v. 5.49, mT/mR = 1.0 v. 1.2, total links = 4,198 v. 90, internal links = 4198 v 90, external links = 275 v. 57, followed links = 4171 v 85, no follow links = 27 v 5, linking root domains = 46 v 30 on-page grade = A v B broad keyword usage in title: yes v yes broad keyword usage in document: yes v yes keyword used in url = no v no keyword used in domain = partial v no KW exact match - no v no exact anchor text links = 2373 v 13 %links w/ exact anchor text = 56% v 14% linking root domains w/ exact anchor text = 7 v 8 % linking root domains w/ exact anchor text = 15% v 26% partial anchor text links = 0 v 0 Domain Authority = 54 v 27 Domain mozRank = 5.4 v 3.2 Domain mozTrust = 5.8 v 3.7 DmT/DmR = 1.1 v 1.2 External links to domain 9261 v 63 Linking root domains to this domain = 355 v 33 linking c- blocks domains to domain = 267 v 30 tweets = 4 v 3 FB shares = 13 v 11 Google Plus one shares = 1 v 0
Competitive Research | | rickt0070 -
In Open Site Explorer, what does it mean when a linking page does not contain any reference to the URl entered?
When running Open Site Explorer on a particular URL, I get a list of linking pages. Many of these pages have a high Page Authority. I am assuming that this is a list of pages that presumably link to the URL I entered. First, is this correct? Next, when I click on an entry in the list I don't see any reference to the URL on the page, even viewing the page source. What does this mean and why is the link in the list?
Competitive Research | | jkenyon1