Multiple 301 redirects for a HTTPS URL. Good or bad?
-
I'm working on an ecommerce website that has a few snags and issues with it's coding.
They're using https, and when you access the website through domain.com, theres a 301 redirect to http://www.domain.com and then this, in turn, redirected to https://www.domain.com.
Would this have a deterimental effect or is that considered the best way to do it. Have the website redirect to http and then all http access is redirected to the https URL?
Thanks
-
My personal rule of thumb - as few redirect jumps as possible. Three main reasons:
1. User journey + Browsers - Sometimes when there are too many redirects taking place, some browsers find it difficult to follow through and would simply not load the page. Also, even if there were only 2-3, the browser may load, but users on slower connections may find it tiresome waiting for content to load.
2. As ThompsonPaul highlights, you COULD lose some link value due to dilution through 301 redirects.
3. Multiple 301 redirects are often used by spammers and I foresee in the near future these causing a lot of ranking headaches. The older the site, the longer the chain might end up - for example, imagine you had a product at:
https://domain.com/product1
Links to that page exist at domain.com/product1The journey would be: domain.com/product1 >http://domain.com/product1 > https://domain.com/product1
Now imagine a year down the line, product 1 is discontinued and you decide to redirect https://domain.com/product1 to domain.com/product2
Imagine your journey now:
domain.com/product1 >http://domain.com/product1 > https://domain.com/product1 > domain.com/product2 >http://domain.com/product2 > https://domain.com/product2
This could carry on indefinitely in the lifetime of the site...
Best solution: Decide what version of the site you want to use and simply try and use only one redirect, not a chain. Periodically check for chained redirects and resolve as you go along. (I try and do this bi annually).
-
To answer your specific question, Jason, yes, there's an issue with those URLs going through two consecutive redirects.
Each redirect, like any link, costs a little bit of "link juice". So running through two consecutive redirects is wasting twice as much link juice as if the origin URL redirects immediately to the final URL without the intermediate step. It's not a massive difference, but on an e-commerce site especially, there's no point in wasting any. (Some folks reckon the loss could be as high as 15% per link/redirect.) Plus, I've occasionally seen problems with referrer data being maintained across multiple redirects (anecdotal).
Hope that answers your specific question?
Paul
-
I agree with Jane. Unless there are reasons why the whole site needs to be secure, it makes more sense for just the areas where sensitive information is being submitted to be SSL encrypted.
http: requests are processed more quickly than https: ones due to the SSL handshake required to produce the cryptographic parameters for the user's session - so your site would be a little quicker if you weren't using SSL.
However, if you do decide to use http: rather than https: for the product & category pages like Jane has suggested - you'd need to ensure that the https: versions of these pages redirect to http:... again to avoid duplicate content.
-
Hi Jason,
To add to what Yusuf has said, is there a specific reason why the whole site has to use SSL, rather than just the parts of the website where sensitive information is passed? If so, I would be tempted to recommend that the e-commerce pages (products, categories, etc.) remain on HTTP URLs.
Cheers,
Jane
-
Hi Jason,
It's fine to 301 redirect from http: to https: and it's quite common for sites that use SSL. It's exactly the same principle as redirecting from a non-www to www (e.g. http://example.com to http://www.example.com) - which is considered to be good practice. But there should only be a single redirect. So you should ensure that http://example.com redirects to https://www.example.com without first redirecting to http://www.example.com.
I would also make sure that all pages (not just the homepage) redirect from http: to https: too to ensure there are no duplicate content issues on the rest of the site.
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 it possible to direct HTTP www 301 to HTTPS non www?
I have a question that has been stumping me and if someone could help I would gladly buy your coffee for a month. I have a website that used to be www and http a year or two ago. Now it is https and non www. A lot of my older links point to the www and http version of my site. This results in two 301 redirects. I.e. A link on another site to my site points to http://www.mysite.com The network waterfall shows: http://www.mysite.com 301 -> http://mysite.com http://mysite.com 301 -> https://mysite.com https://mysite.com (finally) **2 part question. ** **--Do you think that this two 301 redirect hop would affect SEO performance? I can see it did affect page authority through Moz. ** --Is there away around this? I.e. to redirect http:// AND http://www directly to https:// with no hops in between. Thank you!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Stodzy0 -
301 Redirect and Loss of PA and DA
Mozzers, http:itsgr82bme.com Old domain homepage had a DA of 24 and a PA of 36 Currently redirected to http://thekidstime.com Homepage shows a DA of 6 and a PA of 1. That is a significant loss of authority. I thought a 301 is supposed to be better than that. What gives? What are the next steps, asking the old backlinks to update their links? Thanks for your help, Matt
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | matt.nails0 -
Is 1:1 301 redirect required on indexed URL when restructing URL even if the new URL is canonicalized?
Hello folks, We are restructuring some URLS which forms a fair chunk of the content of the domain.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | HB17
These content are auto generated rather than manually created unlike other parts of the website. The same content is currently accessible from two URLs: /used-books/autobiography-a-long-walk-to-freedom-isbn
/autobiography/used-books/a-long-walk-to-freedom-isbn The URL 1 uses the URL 2 as the canonical url and it has worked allright since Moz does
not show the two as duplicate of each other. Google has also indexed the canonical URL although
there is still a few 'URL 1s' which were indexed before the canonical was implemented. The updated URL structure will look like something like this: /used-books/autobiography-a-long-walk-to-freedom-author-name-isbn
/autobiography/used-books/a-long-walk-to-freedom-authore-name-isbn It would be great to have just a single URL but a few business requirement prevents
us from having just the canonical URL only even with the new structure. Since we will still have two URLs to access the same content and we were wondering
whether we will need to do a 1:1 301 redirect on the current URLs or since there will be canonical URL
(/autobiography/used-books/a-long-walk-to-freedom-authore-name-isbn),
we won't need to worry about doing the 1:1 redirect on the the indexed content? Please note that the content will still be accessible from the OLD URL (unless 301ed of course). If it is advisable to do a 1:1 301 redirect this is what we intend to do: /used-books/autobiography-a-long-walk-to-freedom-isbn 301 to
/used-books/autobiography-a-long-walk-to-freedom-author-name-isbn /autobiography/used-books/a-long-walk-to-freedom-isbn 301 to
/autobiography/used-books/a-long-walk-to-freedom-authore-name-isbn Any advice/suggestions would be greated appreciated. Thank you.0 -
What to do about old urls that don't logically 301 redirect to current site?
Mozzers, I have changed my site url structure several times. As a result, I now have a lot of old URLs that don't really logically redirect to anything in the current site. I started out 404-ing them, but it seemed like Google was penalizing my crawl rate AND it wasn't removing them from the index after being crawled several times. There are way too many (>100k) to use the URL removal tool even at a directory level. So instead I took some advice and changed them to 200, but with a "noindex" meta tag and set them to not render any content. I get less errors but I now have a lot of pages that do this. Should I (a) just 404 them and wait for Google to remove (b) keep the 200, noindex or (c) are there other things I can do? 410 maybe? Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | jcgoodrich0 -
Influence on CTR for high traffic keyword in url and redirect
I currently dominate on my site for a very high traffic keyword. My url contains this keyword in it along with the word "Free" in the beginning. Lets say my keyword is "This Keyword" then my url would be freethiskeyword.com. I rank 3rd for this keyword and generates me about 8k on a low month. I was just able to obtain my main keyword as my sole URL through an auction for a measly 2,000.00. (Very Excited about this). So now I have the URL thiskeyword.com What I want to know is what kind of influence can I expect with my new URL have in CTR. Since it is a high traffic keyword is there a automatic "Trust" factor that is involved and will users tend to click on thiskeyword.com as apposed to freethiskeyword.com? My Second Question I am torn as to what I should do with this new URL. Should I redirect my old URL to my new URL and keep both pointing to the same site? or should I try and dominate my niche and build a new site entirely. Since I currently make about 8k a month for third, if I were to build a separate site and be able to obtain 1st place for my new keyword that would generate me 2 amounts in income based on stats. CTR based on http://searchenginewatch.com/article/2049695/Top-Google-Result-Gets-36.4-of-Clicks-Study freethiskeyword.com = 8k/m for 3rd based on 10% of clicks (currently) thiskeyword.com = 24k/m for 1st based on 36% of clicks (in theory) If I keep each site separate and be able to have one site at 3rd and the other at 1st then I would be making about 32k a month. If I redirect my old url to my new url then I would only have 1st place (if I make it to first of course) and that would only make me 24k a month. It seems to me I should keep these sites separate to generate more income. I am torn what I should do. Also with the EMD penalty I am afraid to 301 my site to my new URL since it is my exact keyword as apposed to my current one. I am defiantly branded as "Free This Keyword" so moving it to thiskeyword.com could hurt me more than help (at least I think so) What you think?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | cbielich0 -
Creating 100,000's of pages, good or bad idea
Hi Folks, Over the last 10 months we have focused on quality pages but have been frustrated with competition websites out ranking us because they have bigger sites. Should we focus on the long tail again? One option for us is to take every town across the UK and create pages using our activities. e.g. Stirling
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | PottyScotty
Stirling paintball
Stirling Go Karting
Stirling Clay shooting We are not going to link to these pages directly from our main menus but from the site map. These pages would then show activities that were in a 50 mile radius of the towns. At the moment we have have focused our efforts on Regions, e.g. Paintball Scotland, Paintball Yorkshire focusing all the internal link juice to these regional pages, but we don't rank high for towns that the activity sites are close to. With 45,000 towns and 250 activities we could create over a million pages which seems very excessive! Would creating 500,000 of these types of pages damage our site? This is my main worry, or would it make our site rank even higher for the tougher keywords and also get lots of traffic from the long tail like we used to get. Is there a limit to how big a site should be? edit0 -
Restructuring/Removing 301 Redirects Due To Newly Optimized Keywords
Just to be clear, this is for one unique page on a website. Also, please see my diagram attached. Let's say that a page's URL was originally /original. So, you optimize the page for a new keyword (keyword 1), and therefore change the URL to /keyword-1. A 301 redirect would then be placed... /original > /keyword-1 However, let's say 6 months down the road you realize that the keyword you optimized the page for (keyword 1) just isn't working. You research for a new keyword, and come up with (keyword 2). So, you'd like to rename the page's URL to /keyword-2. After placing a redirect from the current page (keyword 1) to the 'now' new page (keyword 2), it would look like this... /original > /keyword-1 > /keyword-2 We know that making a server go through more than one redirect slows the server load time, and even more 'link-juice' is lost in translation. Because of this, would it make sense to remove the original redirect and instead place redirects like this? /original > /keyword-2 /keyword-1 > /keyword-2 To me, this would make the most sense for preserving SEO. However, I've read that removing 301 redirects can cause user issues due to browsers caching the now 'removed' redirect. Even if this is ideal for SEO, could it be more work than it's worth? Does anyone have any experience/input on this? If so, I greatly appreciate your time! oDvLl.jpg
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | LogicalMediaGroup1 -
Are there any negatives to channeling my links through a 301 redirect?
I'm channeling 1000's of links through another url with a 301 redirect. I've thought this through and can't see any downside to doing this, but I want to get your opinion. Can you see any downside to doing this? With regards to passing anchor text, PR, PA, etc? Since this is done with sites all the time when they change urls, I can't see Google being able to penalize me for this....can you? What do you think?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Brian-M0