Varying Internal Link Anchor Text with Each New Page Load
-
I'm asking for people's opinions on varying internal anchor text. Before you jump in and say, "Oh yes, varying your anchor text is always a good idea", let me explain.
I'm not talking about varying anchor text on different links scattered throughout a site. We all know that is a wise thing to do for a variety of reasons that have been covered in many places. What I'm talking about is including semi-useful links below the fold and then varying the anchor text with each page load. Each time Googlebot crawls a page, it sees different anchor text for each link. That way, Googlebot is seeing, for example, 'san diego bars', 'taverns in san diego', 'san diego clubs', and 'pubs in san diego' all pointing to a San Diego bar/tavern/club/pub page.
I'm wondering if there is value in this approach. Will it help a site rank well for multiple search queries? Could it potentially be better than static anchor text as it may help Google better understand the targeted page? Is it a good way to protect a large site with a huge number of internal links from Penguin?
To summarize, we're talking about the impact of varying the anchor text on a single page with each page load as opposed to varying the anchor text on different pages.
Thoughts?
-
Thanks for everyone's input!
Without pointing any fingers, let's just say this is happening in the wild right now. It came as a bit of a surprise to me as I wouldn't expect Google to be fooled into ranking a site better for multiple keywords based on dynamic internal anchor text. To be clear, I have no evidence this technique is helping or that the motivation is to game Google for better rankings, but I haven't come up with any other reason.
If it is working, I must admit, it's pretty clever...
-
I would say test it out and see what happens. I would love to know the result. ( youmoz post perhaps ? )
what I assume would happen :
The new link only counts when G-bot crawls the page ( and obviously not on each page load ), and each time Gbot crawls the page it will see that an old link is dropped and a new one is added. So what ever value you gain from the new link , you will lose from the old one which is no longer there. So I really don't see the value to be had from an SEO point of view . But repeat visitors to you page may click through to those pages. ( Again testing it will give you solid proof )
-
What comes to me is this: I don't think you'll get the value out of links with dynamic anchor text that you would get with anchor text that is static. A page's overall value and the value it passes on to other page via links is iterative--it's not assigned after just a single pass of the bot. The dynamism would devalue the links, if not render them worthless all together.
And even if you had one thousand variations of anchor texts for each link and they did pass some sort of value, what do you think that footprint would look like after a year or two of google crawls? Upon a manual review, someone there would say, "Huh, look at this, their links change all the time and each one is focused around a specific money term--I think it's obvious that they're trying to manipulate their rankings. Smack--here's a penalty for you."
-
Oh yes, varying your...oh wait sorry you didn't want that haha.
Erm this is an interesting idea - on first read my first thought was you're trying to game the system and that's never a good idea.
Then I thought a little more and I suppose it is very similar to dynamic content such as offers on your linking page, although it always points at one location.
I suppose it is only similar to changing your anchor text manually to see what works best, but I think that such frequent changes could end up getting noticed - a link anchor changing every time Google visits - surely Google is clever enough to notice this pattern and doesn't it smack of over-optimisation?
I bet others have already tried this - have you done any digging to see if you can find out what the impact was?
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
-
Pagination new pages vs parameters
I'm working on a site that currently handles pagination like this cars-page?p=1 cars-page?p=2 In webmaster tools I can then tell ?p= designates pagination However I have a plugin I want to add to fix other seo issues, among those it adds rel="prev" rel="next" and it modifies the pagination to this cars-page-1.html cars-page2.html Notice I lost the parameter here and now each page is a different page url, pagination is no longer a parameter. I will not longer be able to specify the pagination parameter in webmaster tools. Would this confuse google as the pagination is no longer a parameter and there will now be multiple urls instead of one page with parameters? My gut says this would be bad, as I haven't seen this approach often on ecommerce site, but I wanted to see what the community thought?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | K-WINTER0 -
SEO - Massive duplication of same page, but different link.
Hi!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | jennisprints
I'm dealing with a big client who's site has a big (approx. 39 000) duplication of the "same" page (same content) but each page has a different URL. The duplicated page is a "become a member"-page.
I've checked the backlinks in Google Search Console and there are no sites linking to any of the duplicated pages.
The developers have no clue where or how the pages came to be duplicated, but my guess is that every time a new customer sets up an account the page becomes duplicated. The customer want us to just remove the pages and sort out the duplication, but removing the pages might cause a big drop in back links/traffic and what not. I would much rather redirect the duplicated pages to the original page, but given that there are 39 000 pages it might mess with the site speed. Looking for ideas and suggestions of what the next step should be, remove or redirect.
Thanks so much!0 -
Internal links from homepage and other pages
Hello, I'm curious what the difference is between internal links from the homepage and category pages. Make it sense to give some internal links from category pages (with a high PA) to an another page for a boost in the search results? Or is the link value too low in this case? Thanks in advance,
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | MarcelMoz
Marcel1 -
What Are Latest Internal Linking Strategies?
I have been doing a little research, but all the articles are really old. Even the Moz site page is pretty old. So I am wondering, has the strategy changed? Is it OK to still use internal links with your keywords in them? Do you have multiple links on a page? What about a blog post? Do you no follow? What are the thoughts out there on this?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | netviper0 -
Intra-linking to pages with a different Canonical url ?
Hello Moz Community! I'm hoping to get some advice around intra-linking practices and the benefits when a page that is being linked to has a different canonical tag than it's own URL. Confused? Allow me to elaborate. Scenario: Background: Ecommerce Company is trying to increase its organic ranking for key, broad terms in the cycling industry. Ecommerce company is trying to rank its category pages for a main term. To help this, the company focusing on increasing the quality of its intra-linking structure (the links and anchor texts that link to another page within the site). Example goal: to have it's Road Cassettes category page rank for 'Road Cassettes' Company's 'cassettes' main category page is here: /Components/Drivetrain/Cassettes/ And the company uses filtered navigation logic to drill down into 'road cassettes' specifically: /Components/Drivetrain/Cassettes/?page_no=1&fq=ATR_RoadBiking:True SEOs are instructed to include occasional links back to this page, with SEO friendly anchor text, to help strengthen it's authority for the main term. The Issue / Question: Main category URL: /Components/Drivetrain/Cassettes/ Road Cassettes category URL: /Components/Drivetrain/Cassettes/?page_no=1&fq=ATR_RoadBiking:True Road Cassettes Canonical URL: /Components/Drivetrain/Cassettes/ The canonical URL of the filtered Road Cassettes category is its main category URL. Will Company be able to effectively rank its Road Cassettes category URL for 'Road Cassettes' if the canonical URL is the main category? Should the canonical URL not be the main category? OR Will increasing the intra-linking to the Road Cassettes URL help the main category URL rank for 'Road Cassettes' - by passing all it's authority?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Ray-pp0 -
Permanently using 301 for internal link
Hello Folks, Tried going through the 301 answers but could not find any question similar to what I had. The issue we have is we have got a listing page with the products like this: /used-peugeot/used-toyota-corolla As you can see this URL is not really ideal and I want to redirect it to /used-toyota/corolla using mod_rewrite. The redirect will be 301. My concern here is the URL in the listing page won't change to /used-toyota/corolla and hence the 301 will be 'permanently' placed and I was wondering if this will lose some link juice of the 301ed URL. Now with 301 being a 'permanent' redirect one would assume it should not be an issue but I just wanted to be sure that I am correct in assuming so. Thank you for your time.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | nirpan0 -
Rel Canonical Link on the Canonical Page
Is there a problem with placing a rel=canonical link on the canonical page - in addition to the duplicate pages? For example, would that create create an endless loop where the canonical page keeps referring to itself? Two examples that are troubling me are: My home site is www.1099pro.com which is exactly the same as www.1099pro.com/index.asp (all updates to the home page are made by updating the index.asp page). I want www.1099pro.com/index.asp to have the rel=canonical link to point to my standard homepage www.1099pro.com but any update that I make on the index page is automatically incorporated into www.1099pro.com as well. I don't have access to my hosting web server and any updates I make have to be done to the specific landing pages/templates. I am also creating a new website that could possible have pages with duplicate content in the future. I would like to already include the rel=canonical link on the standard canonical page even though there is not duplicate content yet. Any help really would be appreciated. I've read a ton of articles on the subject but none really define whether or not it is ok to have the rel=canonical link on both the canonical page and the duplicate pages. The closest explanation was in a MOZ article that it was ok but the answer was fuzzy. -Mike
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Stew2220 -
Internal Anchor Text - Partial or Exact Match Does It Matter?
When linking internally on an ecommerce site between pages and from a sitemap, is partial or exact match on the anchor text a significant factor? If it matters to Google, which is a better practice to use? I found plenty of info on external links, but precious little on internal links (which suggests it doesn't matter enough to worry about).
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | AWCthreads0