How does this site rank no 1 for big terms with no optimisation?
-
Hi,
A client recently asked me abut a site that appears to have popped up out of nowhere and is ranking for big terms within their industry: http://bit.ly/11jcpky
I have looked at the site for a particular term: Cheap Beds I was using unpersonalised search on google.co.uk with location set to London.
The site currently ranks no 1 for that term and other similar terms.
The question is how?
SEO Moz reports no backlinks (they must have blocked?) Ahrefs and Majestic report report some backlinks but not many and no anchor text with the term in. The Page title and meta do not contain the term nor does the page seem to contain the term anywhere. The domain does have some age though has no keyword match in the URL. I'm a little stumped to how they are achieving these results.
Any Ideas Anyone?
-
I thought this may be the case initially but its not as they have been ranking for a while now, also their backlink profile is not anchor text targeted.
The only real backlinks I can see for them is Groupon, is Google favouring sites featured on Groupon?
-
how recently has the site been ranking? Maybe the site got a load of targeted backlinks very quickly (black hat) and OSE has not picked them up yet.
I have seen this before were the site will rank for a few days ( maybe a week +) before google realises it spam and dumps it.
-
I am aware of other parts of Google's alg's though generally the above mentioned algs are required for a decent listing, location of your server does not make a huge difference and yes agreed with .co.uk making a difference but the site in question is not .co.uk its .com so that point is irrelevant.
The question is not about my clients site ranking higher but a site that ticks none of the major alg factors being number 1 for a big search term.
No optimised meta for target keyword, no optimised backlinks for target keyword, no onpage optimisation for target keyword and a low social metric score.
The only optimisation I can see is meta tags, which Google does not use any more and apparently can do more damage than good if you spam in them which technically this site is doing.
I have also ran the Moz onpage report card for the term Cheap Beds and they get an F! In comparison to the next site down who get a B.
The website is very relevant for the term my question I suppose is how does Google know its relevant without it being optimised?
I am thinking either LSI which doesn't make a lot of sense in this situation, or Google is actually doing some sought of price comparison and working out that their products are cheaper than elsewhere, or Google is actually taking their meta tags into consideration (Highly Unlikely!)
Any suggestions please?
-
There are 200 total parts to Google's algorithm so for me to give you for you to give me only two metrics and for me to give you an honest answer is absolutely impossible unfortunately. However, that domain is ranking higher than you for whatever the keyword search I can twopence is what he said in UK. Make sure that your server is running out of UK mean to say that I mean that the IP address originates in the UK, and you already have a.co.uk TLD I'm assuming? All those things give me one bit. But you've given me two metrics there are so many others nearly 198. If you want an excellent resource I was going to distilled.net/u
sincerely,
Thomas
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
-
Is "Author Rank," User Comments Driving Losses for YMYL Sites?
Hi, folks! So, our company publishes 50+ active, disease-specific news and perspectives websites -- mostly for rare diseases. We are also tenacious content creators: between news, columns, resource pages, and other content, we produce 1K+ pieces of original content across our network. Authors are either PhD scientists or patients/caregivers. All of our sites use the same design. We were big winners with the August Medic update in 2018 and subsequent update in September/October. However, the Medic update in March and de-indexing bug in April were huge losers for us across our monetized sites (about 10 in total). We've seen some recovery with this early June update, but also some further losses. It's a mixed bag. Take a look at this attached MOZ chart, which shows the jumps and falls around the various Medic updates. The pattern is very similar on many of our sites. As per JT Williamson's stellar article on EAT, I feel like we've done a good job in meeting those criteria, which has left we wondering what isn't jiving with the new core updates. I have two theories I wanted to run past you all: 1. Are user comments on YMYL sites problematic for Google now? I was thinking that maybe user comments underneath health news and perspectives articles might be concerning on YMYL sites now. On one hand, a healthy commenting community indicates an engaged user base and speaks to the trust and authority of the content. On the other hand, while the AUTHOR of the article might be a PhD researcher or a patient advocate, the people commenting -- how qualified are they? What if they are spouting off crazy ideas? Could Google's new update see user comments such as these as degrading the trust/authority/expertise of the page? The examples I linked to above have a good number of user comments. Could these now be problematic? 2. Is Google "Author Rank" finally happening, sort of? From what I've read about EAT -- particularly for YMYL sites -- it's important that authors have “formal expertise” and, according to Williamson, "an expert in the field or topic." He continues that the author's expertise and authority, "is informed by relevant credentials, reviews, testimonials, etc. " Well -- how is Google substantiating this? We no longer have the authorship markup, but is the algorithm doing its due diligence on authors in some more sophisticated way? It makes me wonder if we're doing enough to present our author's credentials on our articles, for example. Take a look -- Magdalena is a PhD researcher, but her user profile doesn't appear at the bottom of the article, and if you click on her name, it just takes you to her author category page (how WordPress'ish). Even worse -- our resource pages don't even list the author. Anyhow, I'd love to get some feedback from the community on these ideas. I know that Google has said there's nothing to do to "fix" these downturns, but it'd sure be nice to get some of this traffic back! Thanks! 243rn10.png
Algorithm Updates | | Michael_Nace1 -
How long you've seen it take to rank in small niche
Hello, How long do you see small niche sites taking to rank where they should be for their strength? Our last site took at least 6 months. Our current site's home page for our main term is stuck at around the 40th page and not moving. It's an exact match domain so it should be on at least page 2. We have one site in the industry already that carries similar products but it is much bigger with a much wider scope of products. It took a while to rank too. Our only backlinks I'm working on are Google & Youtube (and DMOZ), we have a facebook fan page. Our site is nicer than the site in position #1. Working on making as many pages as possible 10X content. Thank You, Bob
Algorithm Updates | | BobGW0 -
Big rise in "Keyword not defined"
Hi, all. Anyone else seen a massive increase in the Not Provided keywords in their analytics in the past couple of weeks. Probably related to this (source:http://searchengineland.com/post-prism-google-secure-searches-172487) _In the past month, Google quietly made a change aimed at encrypting all search activity — except for clicks on ads. Google says this has been done to provide “extra protection” for searchers, and the company may be aiming to block NSA spying activity. _ Other than the unreliable stats from WMT, there doesn't seem too many ways which we can now find out what is sending traffic to our sites!
Algorithm Updates | | GrumpyCarl0 -
High ranking but low traffic, what gives?
One of our clients is in the top 3 spots on high volume keywords that get 20-70k hits in the US each month (per adWords keyword tool), but their daily traffic is in the low hundreds. What's going on?
Algorithm Updates | | optimalwebinc0 -
Ranking factors for national and local
What SEO impact factors am I missing if I am ranked 1st on Google for a keyword, but not ranked local search? The keyword being setup like {"company industry" "location" }. Its ranked 4th when searched on google and the location is specific to the location in the keyword. I've tried to varify that all of my citations are correct and identical. When I compare my sites Domain Authority and links to its competitors, I should be dominating that search. If you guys have any incite it would be greatly appreciated. MADD DOGG
Algorithm Updates | | MaddDogg0 -
Big fall between September 27th and 28th
Hello I do not know if it is a panda but my traffic was divided by two between September 27th and 28th... The concerned site is Dismoicomment.fr have you an explanation? Thank you.
Algorithm Updates | | elitepronostic0 -
Are you seeing changes in your sites today? Panda 2.2?
I've heard rumblings of some Panda sites recovering in the last few days and wondered if the talked about Panda 2.2 has been rolled out. My own site (which actually had a significant boost after Panda) has seen a significant increase in traffic today (started about noon EST yesterday) and a nice increase in Adsense revenue as well. How are your sites doing?
Algorithm Updates | | MarieHaynes1 -
CTR for Google Rankings
I run a local business, and I'm working on ranking for keyword + city. I currently rank on the first page for just about every keyword I'm working on, but only the top 3 for a little less than half. Because the search volume is so low for each keyword (for most cities Google doesn't have an estimated monthly search volume) the grand total of a few searches a month for each keyword + city combination is where I get my traffic. Although I seem to be getting consistently higher in the rankings, I am curious as to how much more traffic I can expect. I read somewhere that sites that are ranked number one are clicked 50% of the time, number two 20% of the time, number three 15% and from there on it goes down fast. Rank 7 and on is below 1%. Probably around 30% of my keywords are ranked between 7-10 and probably about 20% are ranked 4-6. Are the CTR numbers fairly accurate? I understand that there are a lot of influences on CTR, such as title/description, but generally is that somewhat accurate? If it is, I am missing out on A LOT of traffic. I am pulling about 800 unique visitors a month from Google. If I get in the top 3 for most of my keywords, can I expect significantly more traffic? I ask the question because there are many other things I could be doing with my time to help the business aside from SEO. I don't want to be working constantly on SEO if traffic is only going to increase very little.
Algorithm Updates | | bjenkins240
