Which metrics are better for linkback when it comes to PA vs DA?
-
Which metrics would be more attractive for receiving a linkback from, at least in theory, from the examples below?
Gettting a link from a high PA page on a low DA site or gettting a link from a low PA page but on a high DA site, or something in the middle with both (assuming all other factors similar).
For example which of these page metrics would be more preferable to be listed on?
site 1: PA:19, DA:75
site 2: PA:1, DA:80
site 3: PA:39, DA:55
Thanks!
-
WBFs are a great resource for those who want to learn.
-
Thanks I somehow missed those whiteboards and they were right on the mark - really enjoyed both!
-
Assuming all other things equal (keyword relevancy, anchor text, etc) I'd go for site 3. The DA is good, but I'm really liking the PA/DA combo on that one. Second choice would be site 1.
-
Hi Emerald,
I would recommend you two very good White-Board-Fridays by Rand Fiskin:
http://www.seomoz.org/blog/which-link-metrics-should-i-use-part-1-of-2-whiteboard-friday
http://www.seomoz.org/blog/which-link-metrics-should-i-use-part-2-of-2-whiteboard-friday
In these two Rand talks about a few tricks and tips how to use the link metrics.
I believe if you watched these videos you will gain the answer to your question.
I hope that helped,
Istvan
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
-
Bad Domain Links - Penguin? - Moz vs. Search Console Stats?
I've been trying to figure out why my site www.stephita.com has lost it's google ranking the past few years. I had originally thought it was due to the Panda updates, but now I'm concerned it might be because of the Penguin update. Hard for me to pinpoint, as I haven't been actively looking at my traffic stats the past years. So here's what I just noticed. On my Google Search Console - Links to your Site, I discovered there are 301 domains, where over 75% seem to be spammy. I didn't actively create those links. I'm using the MOZ - Open site Explorer tool to audit my site, and I noticed there is a smaller set of LINKING DOMAINS, at about 70 right now. Is there a reason, why MOZ wouldn't necessarily find all 300 domains? What's the BEST way to clean this up??? I saw there's a DISAVOW option in the Google Search Console, but it states it's not the best way, as I should be contacting the webmasters of all the domains, which is I assume impossible to get a real person on the other end to REMOVE these link references. HELP! 🙂 What should I do?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | TysonWong0 -
Null Alt Image Tags vs Missing Alt Image Tags
Hi, Would it be better for organic search to have a null alt image tag programatically added to thousands of images without alt image tags or just leave them as is. The option of adding tailored alt image tags to thousands of images is not possible. Is having sitewide alt image tags really important to organic search overall or what? Right now, probably 10% of the sites images have alt img tags. A huge number of those images are pages that aren Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | 945010 -
Affiliate links vs. seo (updated 19.02.2014)
UPDATE - 19.02.2014: Hi, We got another negative answer from Google pointing again to our affiliate links, so the 301 redirect and block was not enough.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Silviu
I understand the need of contacting all of them and ask for the nofollow, we've started the process, but it will take time, alot of time. So I'd like to bring to your attention another 2 scenarious I have in mind: 1. Disavow all the affiliate links.
Is it possible to add big amount of domains (>1000) to the disavow doc.? Anyone tryed this? 2. Serve 404 status for urls coming from affiliates that did not add noffolow attribute.
This way we kinda tell G that content is no longer available, but we will end up with few thousand 404 error pages.
The only way to fix all those errors is by 301 redirecting them afterwards (but this way the link juice might 'restart' flowing and the problem might persist). Any input is welcomed. Thanks Hi Mozers, After a reconsideration request regarding our link profile, we got a 'warning' answer about some of our affiliate sites (links coming from our affiliate sites that violate Google's quality guidelines). What we did (and was the best solution in trying to fix the 'seo mistake' and not to turn off the affiliate channel) was to 301 redirect all those links to a /AFFN/ folder and block this folder from indexing.
We're still waiting for an answer on our last recon. request. I want to know you opinion about this? Is this a good way to deal with this type of links if they're reported? Changing the affiliate engine and all links on the affiliate sites would be a big time and technical effort, that's why I want to make sure it's truly needed. Best,
Silviu0 -
Brackets vs Encoded URLs: The "Same" in Google's eyes, or dup content?
Hello, This is the first time I've asked a question here, but I would really appreciate the advice of the community - thank you, thank you! Scenario: Internal linking is pointing to two different versions of a URL, one with brackets [] and the other version with the brackets encoded as %5B%5D Version 1: http://www.site.com/test?hello**[]=all&howdy[]=all&ciao[]=all
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | mirabile
Version 2: http://www.site.com/test?hello%5B%5D**=all&howdy**%5B%5D**=all&ciao**%5B%5D**=all Question: Will search engines view these as duplicate content? Technically there is a difference in characters, but it's only because one version encodes the brackets, and the other does not (See: http://www.w3schools.com/tags/ref_urlencode.asp) We are asking the developer to encode ALL URLs because this seems cleaner but they are telling us that Google will see zero difference. We aren't sure if this is true, since engines can get so _hung up on even one single difference in character. _ We don't want to unnecessarily fracture the internal link structure of the site, so again - any feedback is welcome, thank you. 🙂0 -
Moz metrics are better than top10 competitors but still no progress
Hi Moz friends, So once in a while I encounter a challenge that I can't figure out so I thought maybe you can help.I would like to enter the top10 in Google.nl for a specific keyword and Moz's OSE is telling me all my metrics are better than most of my competitors. Als my on-page grade is on level (A) but I miss something .. somewhere. The awkward thing is the competition level is very easy .. Hope you guys can help, Cheers, Mark
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | newtraffic0 -
SEO vs 301
I have a website about "Download of games" and im planning open one about "games online" i know that "games online" its super hard to get good ranks, soo im thinking and do a 301 from my website of "download games" to my new website, do you think that is a good strategy ?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | nafera21 -
Multiple domains, which does Google like better?
From a business perspective It seems a better idea to have one site and multiple domains pointing to that one site. Is there any benefit as far as ranking well in Google to having a site set up on each domain with links to the main site? Does you have any success from a business point of view in using this strategy? P.S. This is my 4th question in Beta testing, just want to make sure I'm not taking advantage of your generosity and if it is fine to keep asking questions here.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | iSenseWebSolutions0
