Site has disappeared since Panda 4 despite quality content, help!
-
Our site www.physicalwellbeing.co.uk has lost over 20 first page rankings since the end of May. I assume this is because of Panda 4.0.
All content on the site is high quality and 100% unique, so we did not expect to get penalised. Although I read somewhere that if Google can't read particular js anymore they don't rank you as high.
The site has not been blacklisted as all pages are showing in Google's index and there are no messages on webmaster tools. We have not taken part in any link schemes and have disavowed all low quality links that were pointing there just in case (after the penalty).
Can anybody see anything on www.physicalwellbeing.co.uk that may have cause Panda update to affect it so negatively?
Would really appreciate any help.
-
With a bounce rate that low, do you by chance have multiple GA tracking scripts, or something that's triggering an event even if no one goes to another page? Look at the source code when you're in incognito mode, in case your CMS suppresses one of the GA codes when you're logged in as admin.
[voice of experience and learning the hard way here!]
-
I would say you are bordering on over-optimization. Your alt tags are a bit spammy, you are using the keyword meta tag ( a spam signal), you're using both tags and categories within Wordpress, which can cause duplication.
I agree with the other posters ( and your post on Google), not Panda related - just viewed again by Google.
-
EGOL again thank you for your help it is highly appreciated. Bounce rate is really low at 4% so I am not sure it is that but I take your point. The target audience is more 25-45 really as my client offers Urban Conditioning which would potentially be too much for someone over 45.
Maybe you are right about the pixel info, I think that can be solved by toning down some of the heavy media.
My only issue with both responses here is that it was ranking highly before panda. Where you are pointing out general optimisations and not Panda specific, so what I really need to know is what panda 4.0 has picked up on.
-
Thank you for your comments Lee. I agree that it is a bit media heavy as this was the request when the site was built, we could do with altering it really so that there is just the video or just the slider. The disavow was done well after the rankings drop so I doubt it will be the case.
-
I took a quick look at the site and agree with Lee. The content is good, could be a little thicker but that is probably not the problem.
Just tossing something out... a lot of space is given to huge images, huge whitespace, huge video, huge navigation.... So much that the first word of content is 800 pixels down on the content pages and over 1000 pixels down on the homepage.
So, I am wondering about two things.... 1) are people not going down to look at the content and instead bouncing? 2) are search engines seeing no content in the first thousand pixels and giving you a demotion.
Finally... and I am just saying this, knowing nothing of the business in specific, but being a person who has spent a long life in very intense athletics. Between ages 15 and 45 I would have been one of your best clients. Now, decades later, I am still someone's client, but not a client that matches my first impression of your website. So, if your biz matches the images on the website then you have no need to change. But, if your potential clients are below that intensity then they could be bouncing off of the website, in search for something less rigorous. The images are much higher than my impression of "physical wellbeing".
Maybe you have heard this famous quote that I read in a climbing magazine decades ago.... "The demands of the sport attract a certain type of person.... but at the same time severely limit its appeal."
-
Whilst it is possible that Panda had something to do with your ranking drop I don't think so looking at your site. You have well structured text although it could certainly be thicker on your main pages. Your homepage current has 264 words including headers. Understandably it is challenging creating 100% unique content that is actually high quality whilst being a good length to optimize for Panda.
I would say that where you have disavowed links it is possible that you have disavowed some links which were in fact helping your ranking as opposed to hurting it. This has happened to a number of my clients and the solution is simply to work hard a building natural links.
Alternatively, your homepage is very media heavy (despite being well optimized for page speed). This wouldn't explain such a dramatic drop but it would certainly improve your rank as well as your bounce to bring that load time down. Sliders and videos on the same page even with deferring the JS still add a large data load. Yoast explains this better than I could.
Hope this helps!
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 -
Traffic cut-off since Google core update
Hi all, I am the webmaster of www.chepicap.com/en (Cryptocurrency news), and since the 3rd of june (Google core algorithm update) we got the hammer from Google. Organic traffic dropped with 90%+ overnight. We are still in the dark whether we can do to improve the current situation. Does someone have suggestions regarding this issue?
Algorithm Updates | | NielsDE0 -
Help guide pages from subdirectory must be opened in a new tab?
Hi, We have help guide pages for every feature we provide. They been hosted on different sub directory and we linked them from our website pages. Do we need to make these sub directory pages to open in a new tab when clicked from our website pages? Thanks
Algorithm Updates | | vtmoz0 -
Seperate Blog vs Blog in Site
Hello, When is it useful to have a blog as an external entity, versus a blog embedded in an ecommerce site. My thoughts lean towards making it part of the site to build new content, but I'm open to suggestions.
Algorithm Updates | | BobGW0 -
Do images count as duplicate content.
Hi We have a site called buypropertyanywhere. We sell properties all over the world but at times we use the same images of complexes. Would Google see this as copying from each other therefore duplicate content. Thanks in advance
Algorithm Updates | | Feily0 -
How to Link a Network of Sites w/o Penguin Penalties (header links)
I work for a network of sites that offer up country exclusive content. The content for the US will be different than Canada, Australia, Uk, etc.… but with the same subjects. Now to make navigation easy we have included in the header of every page a drop down that has links to the other countries, like what most of you do with facebook/twitter buttons. Now every page on every site has the same link, with the same anchor text. Example: Penguins in Canada Penguins in Australia Penguins in the USA Because every page of every site has the same links (it's in the header) the "links containing this anchor text" ratio is through the roof in Open Site Explorer. Do you think this would be a reason for penguin penalization? If you think this would hurt you, what would you suggest? no follow links? Remove the links entirely and create a single page of links? other suggestions?
Algorithm Updates | | BeTheBoss0 -
Data on Google Vs Bing, et al and changes to sites.
I am curious to know if anyone has any data that correlates site/page changes like content or Title Tag, H1, etc. and subsequent movement in rankings on Google and Bing and Yahoo? The equation is for example: ABCSite.com/home-page/ makes a change to the H1 and H2 and one paragraph of content is changed. Over next 6 to 12 weeks changes in page rank for the 3 engines is tracked to see where it started and where it "stopped." Obviously, there are more factors than individual algorithms in play here. An example of that would be that a significant number of sites will be indexed in Google by a dev and not in the others. We see this regularly. So, at least from a timing standpoint, different sites are entering/leaving the fray at different rates. We are going to begin to track this but I would love to see any data already around or speak with anyone involved in such a study about what they found. Thanks
Algorithm Updates | | RobertFisher0