How many words in the same page creates keyword stuffing?
-
In the on page report indicates that the maximum is 15. What are the best? It includes keywords on title, description and images names?
-
The problem with "myths" like keyword count/density is that they were probably true once. In the last 90s (pre-Google), if you knew the exact density of keywords to use on any given day, you'd rank pretty well on the early search engines. It was a cat-and-mouse game. Things have changed a lot since then, though.
-
Thank you Peter. More clear now - I was afraid that was a fixed rule.
-
I don't there's a set number or even set density these days - we just try to set some rules of thumb. In some contexts, you could have a keyword 20 times and it could look natural. In others, 10 might look odd.
Typically, I think certain tags, like TITLE, may be looked at in isolation. Even 2-3 repetitions in a TITLE tag can look spammy, especially to users. It's rare that would get you in trouble with Google (they'd need to see a pattern across the site, IMO), but the extra repetitions don't usually have any value, and may actually decrease the ranking value of other, unique keywords.
In general, focus on variations and natural language. Don't get hung up on word counts.
-
I think there's an expert opinion in regards to a numerical quantity, but Google defines a searchable page as something that receives a lot of inbound links (and you can make the landing page have a lot of long-tail keywords that don't duplicate the original keyword as much).
If it starts reading like a content farm, I'd re-think the purpose and aim of the page.
Google also ranks based on natural language, so if it reads quirky to you, it also might cost you some search bucks. Try to write as plainly as possible, and keep the page theme-oriented. Making the pages sticky, content-fresh and keyword rich would be my aim.
Going out on a limb and throwing a number out: I'd say you can go as high as 30-40 if you have long-tail words, you use the words in different but spatially similar context, and definitely not duplicate any content from other landing pages.
Try some multi-variate testing with different saturation levels
kevin
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
-
What is the impact of an off-topic page to other pages on the site?
We are working with a client who has one irrelevant, off-topic post ranking incredibly well and driving a lot of traffic. However, none of the other pages on the site, that are relevant to this client's business, are ranking. Links are good and in-line with competitors for the various terms. Oddly, very few external links reference this off-topic post, most are to the home page. Local profile is also in-line with competitors, including reviews, categorization, geo-targeting, pictures, etc. No spam issues exist and no warnings in Google Search Console. The only thing that seems weird is this off-topic post but that could affect rankings on other pages of the site? Would removing that off-topic post potentially help increase traffic and rankings for the other more relevant pages of the site? Appreciate any and all help or ideas of where to go from here. Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Matthew_Edgar0 -
Duplicate Pages #!
Hi guys, Currently have duplicate pages accross a website e.g. https://archierose.com.au/shop/cart**#!** https://archierose.com.au/shop/cart The only difference is the URL 1 has a hashtag and exclamation tag. Everything else is the same. We were thinking of adding rel canonical tags on the #! versions of the page to the correct URLs. But Google doens't seem to be indexing the #! versions anyway. Does anyone know why this is the case? If Google is not indexing them, is there any point adding rel canonical tags? Cheers, Chris https://archierose.com.au/shop/cart#!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | jayoliverwright0 -
Should I allow a publisher to word-for-word re-publish our article?
A small blog owner has asked if they can word-for-word republish one of our blog articles on their own blog. I'm not sure how to respond. We're don't do any outreach to submit or duplicate our articles throughout the web... so this isn't something being done in mass. And this could be a great signal to Google that somebody else is vouching for the quality of our article, right? However, I'm a bit concerned about word-for-word duplicating. Normally, if somebody is interested in re-publishing, both the re-publisher and our website would get more value out of it if they re-publisher added some form of commentary or extra value to our post when citing it, right? This small blog just started releasing a segment in which they've titled "guest blog Thursday". And given the recent concerns with guest blogging (even though I'm not sure this is the classical sense of guest blogging), I'm even more concerned. Any ideas on how I should respond?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | dsbud0 -
Does Google make continued attempts to crawl an old page one it has followed a 301 to the new page?
I am curious about this for a couple of reasons. We have all dealt with a site who switched platforms and didn't plan properly and now have 1,000's of crawl errors. Many of the developers I have talked to have stated very clearly that the HTacccess file should not be used for 1,000's of singe redirects. I figured If I only needed them in their temporarily it wouldn't be an issue. I am curious if once Google follows a 301 from an old page to a new page, will they stop crawling the old page?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | RossFruin0 -
Keyword Research: How best to target keywords without using a region as part of the search query.
When doing keyword research and trying to rank for a keyword. I am wondering if we need to localize the query by adding a city to it. For example Phoenix Web Design vs. just targeting web design since Google is localizing search results now. Then when creating content and optimizing the site do we just put the keyword in the title and page content or do we also add the region/city to the keyword phrase? Any insight would be appreciated.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | hireawizseo0 -
Why Is This Page Not Ranking?
Hi Mozzers, I can't rank (the page is nowhere on the Google grid that I can find) and I've not been able to move the needle at all on it. The page is http://www.lumber2.com/Western-Saddle-Pads-s/98.htm for keyword "western saddle pads." I'm inclined to think I'm cannabalizing the category with the products so I removed the word saddle from the majority of the product names on page. However, saddle pad or saddle pads is in the meta title for most if not all of the products. Do you think I'm cannabalizing with the product titles or is there something else going on? Thanks for any help.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | AWCthreads0 -
Dynamic pages - ecommerce product pages
Hi guys, Before I dive into my question, let me give you some background.. I manage an ecommerce site and we're got thousands of product pages. The pages contain dynamic blocks and information in these blocks are fed by another system. So in a nutshell, our product team enters the data in a software and boom, the information is generated in these page blocks. But that's not all, these pages then redirect to a duplicate version with a custom URL. This is cached and this is what the end user sees. This was done to speed up load, rather than the system generate a dynamic page on the fly, the cache page is loaded and the user sees it super fast. Another benefit happened as well, after going live with the cached pages, they started getting indexed and ranking in Google. The problem is that, the redirect to the duplicate cached page isn't a permanent one, it's a meta refresh, a 302 that happens in a second. So yeah, I've got 302s kicking about. The development team can set up 301 but then there won't be any caching, pages will just load dynamically. Google records pages that are cached but does it cache a dynamic page though? Without a cached page, I'm wondering if I would drop in traffic. The view source might just show a list of dynamic blocks, no content! How would you tackle this? I've already setup canonical tags on the cached pages but removing cache.. Thanks
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Bio-RadAbs0 -
Resources for how to code pages...
I'm looking for some nuts and bolts ideas about how to best layout the HTML code for a webpage. Can you point to some case studies? Perhaps you've done some testing yourself? This could be folded into the Tom Critchlow's question about what should be included in a updated developers SEO cheat sheet.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | 19prince0