Are there discrepancies between GWT and SEOMoz?
-
In our keyword rank tracking report, we've dominated a keyword in Google and have secured the slot for years. All evidence points in this direction. In Google Webmaster Tools, however, this particular keyword averages a rank of 6.5. Is anyone else experience these kinds of discrepancies? What is your take on it?
-
That makes MUCH more sense. I'll Google it a bit and see what others have to say. Thanks Keri!
-
If I remember correctly, Google is doing an average of all of the pages that rank for that term. So if your privacy policy ranks in 20th position for your company name, that gets factored in. I think that's how it works, but could be wrong. It should be a place to start looking for information though.
-
Everything is way off. Even our company name according to GWT is ranking at an average of 4.5. Does GWT also include universal results in their ranking report?
-
The scope of data Google has ( i would not expect them to show all that to user through GWT ) and OSE has are not the same so there will be some discrepancies, here and there .
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
-
Mobile Googlebot vs Desktop Googlebot - GWT reports - Crawl errors
Hi Everyone, I have a very specific SEO question. I am doing a site audit and one of the crawl reports is showing tons of 404's for the "smartphone" bot and with very recent crawl dates. If our website is responsive, and we do not have a mobile version of the website I do not understand why the desktop report version has tons of 404's and yet the smartphone does not. I think I am not understanding something conceptually. I think it has something to do with this little message in the Mobile crawl report. "Errors that occurred only when your site was crawled by Googlebot (errors didn't appear for desktop)." If I understand correctly, the "smartphone" report will only show URL's that are not on the desktop report. Is this correct?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Carla_Dawson0 -
2.3 million 404s in GWT - learn to live with 'em?
So I’m working on optimizing a directory site. Total size: 12.5 million pages in the XML sitemap. This is orders of magnitude larger than any site I’ve ever worked on – heck, every other site I’ve ever worked on combined would be a rounding error compared to this. Before I was hired, the company brought in an outside consultant to iron out some of the technical issues on the site. To his credit, he was worth the money: indexation and organic Google traffic have steadily increased over the last six months. However, some issues remain. The company has access to a quality (i.e. paid) source of data for directory listing pages, but the last time the data was refreshed some months back, it threw 1.8 million 404s in GWT. That has since started to grow progressively higher; now we have 2.3 million 404s in GWT. Based on what I’ve been able to determine, links on this particular site relative to the data feed are broken generally due to one of two reasons: the page just doesn’t exist anymore (i.e. wasn’t found in the data refresh, so the page was simply deleted), or the URL had to change due to some technical issue (page still exists, just now under a different link). With other sites I’ve worked on, 404s aren’t that big a deal: set up a 301 redirect in htaccess and problem solved. In this instance, setting up that many 301 redirects, even if it could somehow be automated, just isn’t an option due to the potential bloat in the htaccess file. Based on what I’ve read here and here, 404s in and of themselves don’t really hurt the site indexation or ranking. And the more I consider it, the really big sites – the Amazons and eBays of the world – have to contend with broken links all the time due to product pages coming and going. Bottom line, it looks like if we really want to refresh the data on the site on a regular basis – and I believe that is priority one if we want the bot to come back more frequently – we’ll just have to put up with broken links on the site on a more regular basis. So here’s where my thought process is leading: Go ahead and refresh the data. Make sure the XML sitemaps are refreshed as well – hopefully this will help the site stay current in the index. Keep an eye on broken links in GWT. Implement 301s for really important pages (i.e. content-rich stuff that is really mission-critical). Otherwise, just learn to live with a certain number of 404s being reported in GWT on more or less an ongoing basis. Watch the overall trend of 404s in GWT. At least make sure they don’t increase. Hopefully, if we can make sure that the sitemap is updated when we refresh the data, the 404s reported will decrease over time. We do have an issue with the site creating some weird pages with content that lives within tabs on specific pages. Once we can clamp down on those and a few other technical issues, I think keeping the data refreshed should help with our indexation and crawl rates. Thoughts? If you think I’m off base, please set me straight. 🙂
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ufmedia0 -
Images Sitemap GWT - not indexed?
So we went ahead and created an image sitemap of 2387 images, one for each product - I was hoping it would give us better exposure in image results. No joy, over 7 days and they only showing as "sent" but not "indexed". Any ideas?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | bjs20100 -
301s Creating Soft 404s in GWT
Hi, We re-did a section of a site and got rid of hundreds of pages of no longer relevant content. We 301'd the urls to the category homepage. Now, GWT calls these soft 404s. a) Should we have done something differently instead of 301ing? b) Are these hundreds of soft 404 errors a big problem or threat to how Google sees us for SEO? c) Should we correct this in some way? Thanks... Darcy
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | 945010 -
SEOMOZ crawl all my pages
SEOMOZ crawl all my pages including ".do" (all web pages after sign up ) . Coz of this it finishes all my 10.000 crawl page quota and be exposed to dublicate pages. Google is not crawling pages that user reach after sign up. Because these are private pages for customers I guess The main question is how we can limit SEOMOZ crawl bot. If the bot can stay out of ".do" java extensions it'll perfect to starting SEO analysis. Do you know think about it? Cheers Example; .do java extension (after sign up page) (Google can't crawl) http://magaza.turkcell.com.tr/showProductDetail.do?psi=1001694&shopCategoryId=1000021&model=Apple-iPhone-3GS-8GB Normal Page (Google can crawl) http://magaza.turkcell.com.tr/telefon/Apple-iPhone-3GS-8GB/1001694/.html
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | hcetinsoy0 -
SEOMOZ duplicate page result: True or false?
SEOMOZ say's: I have six (6) duplicate pages. Duplicate content tool checker say's (0) On the physical computer that hosts the website the page exists as one file. The casing of the file is irrelevant to the host machine, it wouldn't allow 2 files of the same name in the same directory. To reenforce this point, you can access said file by camel-casing the URI in any fashion (eg; http://www.agi-automation.com/Pneumatic-grippers.htm). This does not bring up a different file each time, the server merely processes the URI as case-less and pulls the file by it's name. What is happening in the example given is that some sort of indexer is being used to create a "dummy" reference of all the site files. Since the indexer doesn't have file access to the server, it does this by link crawling instead of reading files. It is the crawler that is making an assumption that the different casings of the pages are in fact different files. Perhaps there is a setting in the indexer to ignore casing. So the indexer is thinking that these are 2 different pages when they really aren't. This makes all of the other points moot, though they would certainly be relevant in the case of an actual duplicated page." ****Page Authority Linking Root Domains http://www.agi-automation.com/ 43 82 http://www.agi-automation.com/index.html 25 2 http://www.agi-automation.com/Linear-escapements.htm 21 1 www.agi-automation.com/linear-escapements.htm 16 1 http://www.agi-automation.com/Pneumatic-grippers.htm 30 3 http://www.agi-automation.com/pneumatic-grippers.htm 16 1**** Duplicate content tool estimates the following: www and non-www header response; Google cache check; Similarity check; Default page check; 404 header response; PageRank dispersion check (i.e. if www and non-www versions have different PR).
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | AGIAutomation0 -
SEOMoz mistaking image pages as duplicate content
I'm getting duplicate content errors, but it's for pages with high-res images on them. Each page has a different, high-res image on it. But SEOMoz keeps telling me it's duplicate content, even though the images are different (and named different). Is this something I can ignore or will Google see it the same way too?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | JHT0
