What is the most optimal URL structure
-
A colleague and I are discussing the most optimal URL structure for both search engines and users. Our first disagreement comes in terms of files.
So for instance if I have a small site, www.abc.com, with a service landing page and 3 specific services, which structure is preferred?
The second issue is in terms of breaking up words in the URL. Should you use hyphens or not? Using the first example, which is preferred?
I'm also looking for articles/case studies that support either side. Thank you in advance for your help!
-
"I don't think Google is sophisticated enough to breakup a string into words without hyphens"
I wonder though... they might very well use the same algo that they use when you misspell something in the search box on google.com
Try typing in two conjoined words and it manages to separate them asking, "Did you mean..."
You brought up an interesting point.
-
Don't forget to consider how your URL structure can help with effective Google Analytics tracking. Lunametrics has a good post on designing a GA-friendly site structure at http://www.lunametrics.com/blog/2010/09/22/designing-google-analytics-friendly-site/
-
There are quite a few factors at play here.
1. I've always preferred, as a developer, to have end-pages split up into categories and sub-categories for ease of development. However, it also let's the user know where they are within the site simply by looking at the URL.
There really is no right or wrong. You just have to do what makes sense for the site. If we're talking a micro-site here, with only a handful of pages, then you don't need to create categories and sub-categories. Just make a straight up URL, ie. /vacuum-services.html instead of doing /services/vacuums/
Remember to try and keep your preferred keywords to the foremost left of the URL to ensure some significance is placed on them. Not imperative, but if you can, I'd suggest it.
2. Always use hyphens to break up a word. Underscores are seen as a form of concatenation by search engines, whereas hyphens are seen as separators. Using neither is not recommended as it's not legible to the end-user and ultimately just forms one large word comprised of several keywords. No good.
-
I'd suggest keeping the page as close to the root domain as possible. Don't put directories in-between as you did in the following example: www.abc.com/services/service1
Also, utilize hyphens to separate the words. I don't think Google is sophisticated enough to breakup a string into words without hyphens (could be wrong).
Lastly, if you're planning on trying to get into Google News, one of the requirements is to have a 3+ digit string in your URL. So something along the lines of www.abc.com/home-remodeling-123
Hope that helps!
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 is the AMP tool saying I have invalid structured data when the structured data tool shows no errors?
Why is the AMP tool saying there's missing or invalid structured data on http://www.tasteofhome.com/recipes/flavorful-chicken-fajitas/amp when the structured data tool shows no errors? In addition, I'm not able to see a preview of the rich card in the AMP tool like I can for other recipes like https://allrecipes.com/recipe/19621/eggs-on-the-grill/amp/. If you check https://allrecipes.com/recipe/19621/eggs-on-the-grill/amp in the AMP tool, we get this message: "Page has valid structured data. This page is eligible for extended AMP features." Google has instructions on how to get rich cards for recipes (https://developers.google.com/search/docs/data-types/recipes), but i'm not sure if we're violating anything other than image aspect ratio. Thanks!
Algorithm Updates | | dianedragan0 -
URL in SERP: Google's stand
Months back, we can notice "keyword" will be bold and highlighted if its in the SERP URL. Now Google no more highlights any URLs even with exact match of keyword we search. Beside UI, Does this mean Google might devalued or reduced the importance of URL as ranking factor? We can see many search results match partially or completely in URL with search keywords.
Algorithm Updates | | vtmoz0 -
Is having an identical title, h1 and url considered "over optimization"? Is it better to vary?
To get some new pages out without over-thinking things, I decided to line up the title tag, h1 tag and URLs of my pages exactly. They are dynamically generated based on the content the user is viewing (internal search results pages) They're not ranking very well at the moment, but there are a number of factors that are likely to blame. But, in particular, does anyone know if varying the text in these elements tends to perform better vs. having them all identical? Has there been any information from Google about this? Most if not all of the "over optimization" content I have seen online pertains to backlinks, not on-page content. It's easy to say, "test it!" And of course, that's just what I'm planning to do. But I thought I would leverage the combined knowledge of this forum to see what information I could obtain first, so I can do some informed testing, as tests can take a while to see results. Thanks 🙂
Algorithm Updates | | ntcma0 -
Optimizing for Lawyer vs Attorney Words
With Hummingbird update, my client's personal injury lawyer site went from very good positions for top terms in Google to oblivion. The site had primary landing pages for parallel terms such as "dog bite lawyer" and "dog bite attorney", among other. He does work in Philadelphia and Pennsylvania, so we focus on key phrases for both "Philadelphia dog bite lawyer" and "Pennsylvania dog bite lawyer" etc. I've decided to investigate siloing more deeply, but am unsure whether Google now considers attorney searches to be the same as lawyer searches, which would mean we would silo for "Pennsylvania" and "Philadelphia" not "Attorney" and "Lawyer". Any real world experience in this anyone? Thanks
Algorithm Updates | | JCDenver0 -
Google is forcing a 301 by truncating our URLs
Just recently we noticed that google has indexed truncated urls for many of our pages that get 301'd to the correct page. For example, we have:
Algorithm Updates | | mmac
http://www.eventective.com/USA/Massachusetts/Bedford/107/Doubletree-Hotel-Boston-Bedford-Glen.html as the url linked everywhere and that's the only version of that page that we use. Google somehow figured out that it would still go to the right place via 301 if they removed the html filename from the end, so they indexed just: http://www.eventective.com/USA/Massachusetts/Bedford/107/ The 301 is not new. It used to 404, but (probably 5 years ago) we saw a few links come in with the html file missing on similar urls so we decided to 301 them instead thinking it would be helpful. We've preferred the longer version because it has the name in it and users that pay attention to the url can feel more confident they are going to the right place. We've always used the full (longer) url and google used to index them all that way, but just recently we noticed about 1/2 of our urls have been converted to the shorter version in the SERPs. These shortened urls take the user to the right page via 301, so it isn't a case of the user landing in the wrong place, but over 100,000 301s may not be so good. You can look at: site:www.eventective.com/usa/massachusetts/bedford/ and you'll noticed all of the urls to businesses at the top of the listings go to the truncated version, but toward the bottom they have the full url. Can you explain to me why google would index a page that is 301'd to the right page and has been for years? I have a lot of thoughts on why they would do this and even more ideas on how we could build our urls better, but I'd really like to hear from some people that aren't quite as close to it as I am. One small detail that shouldn't affect this, but I'll mention it anyway, is that we have a mobile site with the same url pattern. http://m.eventective.com/USA/Massachusetts/Bedford/107/Doubletree-Hotel-Boston-Bedford-Glen.html We did not have the proper 301 in place on the m. site until the end of last week. I'm pretty sure it will be asked, so I'll also mention we have the rel=alternate/canonical set up between the www and m sites. I'm also interested in any thoughts on how this may affect rankings since we seem to have been hit by something toward the end of last week. Don't hesitate to mention anything else you see that may have triggered whatever may have hit us. Thank you,
Michael0 -
What is the best url format ?
hello, I have the multiple site with file format url like contact-us.php, search.php, index.html But now i am going to update my site using any framework such as yii, cakephp, now i need the best suggestion, i wanted to create the seo friendly site, so what is the best format for ulr, 1. file format such as contact-us.php, index.html, about-us.html [or] 2. path based url such as contact-us/ , about-my-company/ [or] 3. path based without slash like contact-us, about-my-company Please provide me the best solution for above Thanks Alex
Algorithm Updates | | massimobrogi0 -
Google dance/over optimized/paranoid?
Hi guys, hope your all OK and thanks in advance for taking a nosey at this. OK where to start - my rankings for the last 12 months have progressively improved every week, usually of the 300 KWs i track the last few months has seen approx 70 up/70down per week, but the improvements usually outweigh the declines. This week I saw a sudden drop though - 35 improvements and 112 declines. The strange thing was though, the improvements came on the more competitive KWs, and the less competitive words I haven't done much or any back linking for dropped. Seems silly me asking this question when I run that through my head ofcouse KWs you don;t work on will drop like flies? It should be plainly obvious those words would drop off but all have been improving on there own slowly over the last 6/7 months. Now if this was a penalty (nothing showing in webmaster tools) I would have expected it to come through on my KWs I have over done the backlinking for, but these are the 1's that improved. So is it just the Google Dance? I normally see some words such as the big 1 we target DJ Equipment go from position 13 - 24 can change hourly sometimes! Could it just be quite a few have dropped all at once and will pop back up this week? Also if anyone could give us any pointers in general on where you think we should be taking our SEO it would be much appreciated. I know we have been a little lazy with our backlinking and could do with some much better/ industry related websites linking to us, and there are title tags/metas on product page that need sorting.. aside these couple of issue's? DJs Only
Algorithm Updates | | allan-chris0 -
Top 5 most optimized websites
Throwing this question out to the community but was wondering if anyone can direct me on how I can find the top 5 or 10 ten sites that have been most optimized for search engines. Meaning which web sites have the best reputation when it comes to website optimization for search engines or is there a resource where I can read about websites that have been ranked as the best when it comes to following best practices and have constantly ranked well within their industry? Figured it's always a good idea to learn from the best by looking at what they are doing. Thank you.
Algorithm Updates | | DRTBA2