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
-
Are SEO Friendly URLS Less Important Now That Google Is Indexing Breadcrumb Markup?
Hi Moz Community and staffers, Would appreciate your thoughts on the following question: **Are SEO friendly URLS less important now that Google is indexing breadcrumb markup in both desktop and mobile search? ** Background that inspired the question: Our ecommerce platform's out of the box functionality has very limited "friendly url" settings and would need some development work to setup an alias for more friendly URLS. Meanwhile, the breadcrumb markup is implemented correctly and indexed so it seems there's no longer an argument for improved CTR with SEO friendly URLS . With that said I'm having a hard time justifying the URL investment, as well as the 301 redirect mapping we would need to setup, and am wondering if more friendly URLs would lead to a significant increase in rankings for level of effort? Sidenote: We already rank well for non-brand and branded searches since we are brand manufacturer with an ecommerce presence. Our breadcrumbs are much cleaner & concise than our URL structure. Here are a couple examples. Category URL: http://www.mysite.com/browse/category1/subcat2/subcat3/_/N-7th
Algorithm Updates | | jessekanman
Breadcrumb: www.mysite.com > category1 > subcat2 > subcat3 Product URL: http://www.mysite.com/product/product-name/_/R-133456E112
Breadcrumb: www.mysite.com > category1 > subcat2 > subcat3 > product name The "categories" contain actual keywords just hiding them here in the example. According to my devs they can't get rid of the "_" but could possible replace it with a letter. Also they said it's an easier fix to make the URLs always lower case. Lastly some of our product URLS contain non-standard characters in the product name like "." and "," which is also a simpler fix according to my developers. Looking forward to your thoughts on the topic! Jesse0 -
Should we use brand name of product in URL
Hi all, What is best for SEO. We sell products online. Is it good to mention the brand in the product detail page URL key if (part of) the brand is also in the home url? So our URL is: www.brandXstore.com Is it best to do: www.brandXstore.com/brandX-productA.html of just do: www.brandXstore.com/ProductA.html Thanks for quick answering 😉
Algorithm Updates | | RetailClicks1 -
What are the advantages and disadvantages of having multiple folders in URL?
Example: http://www.domain.com.ph/property-for-sale/city/area/ (3 folders) Would it be great if we'll just use http://www.domain.com.ph/property-for-sale-area-city/ (All pages will be under 1 folder)? Thanks in advance! 🙂
Algorithm Updates | | esiow20130 -
Canonical URl
Hello, All the pages of my site contained canonical url it shows me in the source, but on seomoz site it shows error that some the pages not containing canonical urls, anyone will help me ??
Algorithm Updates | | KLLC0 -
Similar URLs
If I have two similar urls: www.investormill.com/unemployment-rate and www.investormill.com/unemployment-rate-annual Would this confuse search engines or "cannibalize" my content? For clarity: the first page would provide data on the monthly unemployment rate, the second would provide an annual unemployment rate figure. So, there would be a unique series on each page. Just trying to figure out how to best approach this when crafting urls. Thanks for your help!
Algorithm Updates | | investormill0 -
Vanity URL's and http codes
We have a vanity URL that as recommended is using 301 http code, however it has been discovered the destination URL needs to be updated which creates a problem since most browsers and search engines cache 301 redirects. Is there a good way to figure out when a vanity should be a 301 vs 302/307? If all vanity URL's should use 301, what is the proper way of updating the destination URL? Is it a good rule of thumb that if the vanity URL is only going to be temporary and down the road could have a new destination URL to use 302, and all others 301? Cheers,
Algorithm Updates | | Shawn_Huber0 -
Urls have dates - bad? terrible?
My URLs include dates: example.com/2009-05/post-about-something.html I know this isn't the 'best', but is there any reason to be concerned? Some panda, duplicate content, google hates date in URLs, I should know about?
Algorithm Updates | | comforteagle0 -
Local SEO url format & structure: ".com/albany-tummy-tuck" vs ".com/tummy-tuck" vs ".com/procedures/tummy-tuck-albany-ny" etc."
We have a relatively new site (re: August '10) for a plastic surgeon who opened his own solo practice after 25+ years with a large group. Our current url structure goes 3 folders deep to arrive at our tummy tuck procedure landing page. The site architecture is solid and each plastic surgery procedure page (e.g. rhinoplasty, liposuction, facelift, etc.) is no more than a couple clicks away. So far, so good - but given all that is known about local seo (which is a very different beast than national seo) quite a bit of on-page/architecture work can still be done to further improve our local rank. So here a a couple big questions facing us at present: First, regarding format, is it a given that using geo keywords within the url indispustibly and dramatically impacts a site's local rank for the better (e.g. the #2 result for "tummy tuck" and its SHENANIGANS level use of "NYC", "Manhattan", "newyorkcity" etc.)? Assuming that it is, would we be better off updating our cosmetic procedure landing page urls to "/albany-tummy-tuck" or "/albany-ny-tummy-tuck" or "/tummy-tuck-albany" etc.? Second, regarding structure, would we be better off locating every procedure page within the root directory (re: "/rhinoplasty-albany-ny/") or within each procedure's proper parent category (re: "/facial-rejuvenation/rhinoplasty-albany-ny/")? From what I've read within the SEOmoz Q&A, adding that parent category (e.g. "/breast-enhancement/breast-lift") is better than having every link in the root (i.e. completely flat). Third, how long before google updates their algorithm so that geo-optimized urls like http://www.kolkermd.com/newyorkplasticsurgeon/tummytucknewyorkcity.htm don't beat other sites who do not optimize so aggressively or local? Fourth, assuming that each cosmetic procedure page will eventually have strong link profiles (via diligent, long term link building efforts), is it possible that geo-targeted urls will negatively impact our ability to rank for regional or less geo-specific searches? Thanks!
Algorithm Updates | | WDeLuca0