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
-
Should we include URLs with parameters in the sitemap?
Hi, I wanted to know whether we can include URLs with search parameters in the sitemap. Currently, we are trying to append structured data for our job listing page. There happens to be a large number of job listings around 1000 pages with unique job-id and location. Should we add these pages in the sitemap or is there any other solution to this? Regards, Tejas
Algorithm Updates | | tejasbansode0 -
Optimize for separate words or combined word.
I can't find good answers to this question so I'm asking here. Thanks for any help you can give. Most people, 4 out of 5, search for our product using two separate words, while the trademarked name of the product is one word. Think: CleanCar(tm) vs Clean Car. However our product is a leader in the industry so it would be like searching for perhaps "Play Station" vs "Playstation" if people were looking for a gaming console in general. Google separates them in the search volumes so I am assuming it does not see Clean Car in the same way it sees CleanCar. I (obviously) want to rank as highly as possible in both while keeping brand integrity in mind. Should I SEO for just the CleanCar or both? Perhaps using CleanCar in the title and Clean Car in the description? Does Google distinguish? Thanks! bnew
Algorithm Updates | | mcampanaro0 -
Optimizing Site for Multiple Business Services
I am currently optimizing for a site that does a ton of services:
Algorithm Updates | | ccdispoto
Web Development
Logo Design
SEO
Copywriting
Social Media
Email Marketing
PPC Marketing Is it better practice to optimize one "Services" page for multiple keywords or to break each service onto its own unique URL and optimize each page individually?0 -
Key Word in URL - To Include or Exclude?
Hi MoZ Community, Key word inclusion in URL has been discussed a fair bit on here and curious for some feedback on two options on URL structure. Ran’s #3 tip from his recent ‘15 SEO Best Practices for Structuring URLs’ states that key word inclusion still has some value but I’m not too sure if we’re going too far with the below examples. We sell footwear and only footwear for Women, Men & Kids and use those words as our key menu headings at the top. Under each of the main headings within a mega menu the users then has the choice to ‘shop by style’, ‘shop by brand’ etc… The key question or feedback is about including the word ‘shoes’ in my URLs as many of the top ranking competitors do it. e.g. /women-shoes-heels, womens-shoes-sandals or womens-shoes/heels, womens-shoes/sandals I think Google is smart enough to determine we have a shoe store and not sure of the value from a SEO or user experience perspective of adding the additional word. Thoughts on going with option A or B would be valued.... Option A - http://shopname.com/womens/sandals, http://shopname.com/womens/heels OR Option B - http://shopname.com/womens-shoes/sandals, http://shopname.com/womens-shoes/heels Thanks, | | |
Algorithm Updates | | chewythedog
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |0 -
Should We Switch from Several Exact Match URLs to Subdomains Instead?
We are a company with one product customized for different vertical markets. Our sites are each setup on their own unique domains:
Algorithm Updates | | contactatonce
contactatonce.com (Brand)
autodealerchat.com (Auto Vertical)
apartmentchat.com (Apartment Vertical)
chatforrealestate.com (Real Estate Vertical) We currently rank well on the respective keyword niches including:
- auto dealer chat (exact match), automotive chat, dealer chat
- apartment chat (exact match), property chat, multifamilly chat
- chat for real estate (exact match), real estate chat To simplify the user experience we are considering moving to a single domain and subdomain structure: contactatonce.com
auto.contactatonce.com
apartment.contactatonce.com
realestate.contactatonce.com QUESTIONS:
1. Considering current Google ranking strategies, do we stand to lose keyword related traffic by making this switch?
2. Are there specific examples you can point to where an individual domain and subdomains each ranked high on Google across a variety of different niches? (I'm not talking about Wikipedia, Blogger, Blogspot, Wordpress, Yahoo Answers, etc. which are in their own class, but a small to mid size brand). Thank you,
Aaron0 -
Choosing domain name - ccTLD vs Vanity URL
I have to choose between a country specific domain name that is long and difficult to remember, vs or a .me domain which is short and contains the exact keywords I'm optimising for. The challenge is that I'm only targeting local search traffic for the service I am advertising. Does a country specific domain name have any benefits in terms of weighting when I'm only interested in traffic from that country?
Algorithm Updates | | flashie0 -
Why does Google say they have more URLs indexed for my site than they really do?
When I do a site search with Google (i.e. site:www.mysite.com), Google reports "About 7,500 results" -- but when I click through to the end of the results and choose to include omitted results, Google really has only 210 results for my site. I had an issue months back with a large # of URLs being indexed because of query strings and some other non-optimized technicalities - at that time I could see that Google really had indexed all of those URLs - but I've since implemented canonical URLs and fixed most (if not all) of my technical issues in order to get our index count down. At first I thought it would just be a matter of time for them to reconcile this, perhaps they were looking at cached data or something, but it's been months and the "About 7,500 results" just won't change even though the actual pages indexed keeps dropping! Does anyone know why Google would be still reporting a high index count, which doesn't actually reflect what is currently indexed? Thanks!
Algorithm Updates | | CassisGroup0 -
The related: query for one of my urls makes no sense
I'm trying to compete regarding keyword X. Currently, I'm on first page, 7-8th position. If, for each one of the urls listed in first page for such keyword, I search for related:[url], I get similar results for all of them, but mine. Mine shows inconsistent results, none of which related to the same topic as the other 9 in the top 10. Looking at them, the only hypothesis I am able to formulate is that, somehow, google is linking the url to its paid banners in big media. However, such banners go through an adserver and/or are declared as nofollow. Is there any obvious reason that could be causing this? I wonder if we are on page 1 even though we're considered pretty-much 'off-topic' regarding the keyword.
Algorithm Updates | | jleanv240