Keyword Density Clarification, Please
-
Does keyword density only account for the content-based text on the page or everything that can be crawled on the page?
To illustrate, I'll use this forum page and the keyword Moz. Here's my incredibly short blog post:
"Moz forum is very helpful, but I still can't figure out Moz analytics."
Now, in terms of keyword density, is "Moz" only being counted twice for the times I mentioned it in my post (what I'm calling content-based text) or is "Moz" being counted 40-50 times for all the places it appears on this page.
Thanks,
Ruben
-
I'm not looking for a tool to tell me yes or no, and I have the scores I want...I've been pretty clear about that. Why is it you assume wanting to know information, means something nefarious? I inherited a site I didn't build, and I'm trying to fix it. I can't do that without knowing how things are measured. If you don't want to help, don't help. You don't need to accuse me or take things personally, because I'm a competitor.
-
To simply answer your question, perform a Google Search for "Google's Amit Singhal keyword density". Amit's research paper may prove useful to you on your quest.
Because your are in my client's competitive geo area, I do look at your site from time to time. To guide your question, take a look at your boat accident page:
http://www.kempruge.com/personal-injury/boating-accidents/
This really does read as keyword stuffing. You have way too many variations of "boat accident" on a page with very little content. Which may partly explain why your page is buried on page 3 for "Tampa Boat Accident Attorney". Your page is NOT written for the reader, it's obviously written for the search engine. BIG MISTAKE.
You are looking for a tool to tell you yes or no, and the best tool for this is the Moz on-grade checker. If you aren't getting the score you want there.... then I'd question your content. You probably won't get much assistance in this forum if you are looking for advice on how to effectively keyword stuff under the radar. The SEO professionals here probably won't engage to help you.
-
I need to clarify, I do not care if keyword density is a good thing or a bad thing. All I want to know is how it is calculated. I'm not looking for advice, just the formula for how it determined. It's a curiosity I'd like answered. Does it take into consideration every single word on the page (including footers, sidebars, etc) or just what's "in the middle" so to speak?
-
When you use the OnPage Grader, scroll down under the scores. It will give you green checks and red x's and will indicate what is critical or optional. You want as many as the critical items completed as possible. Really, you want as many green checks as possible, but in some cases it's not always possible (like the URL). If you are spamming on a page, it will tell you that too.
-
I did use the OnPage Grader, and it says I'm fine. But, it doesn't tell me how it's calculated.
-
Use the Moz OnPage Grader if you are that concerned about keyword stuffing... because chances are.. if you are concerned about it... you probably are!!! The Grader will tell you.
-
The word on keyword density was a factor back in the day. Many years ago, the ratio was 3.7% to 4.2% of keyword usage compared to the remainder of copy. They state this no longer applicable, but this I think this addresses your question more specifically.
-
-
Maybe I should clarify. I'm not looking at keyword density as a way to boost my rankings. I'm trying to make sure I understand how it is determined, so I don't get any keyword stuffing penalties.
-
Totally agree. Keyword density is really the last thing you should focus SEO efforts on (other than meta keywords :P).
From my understanding, the only important part of the page lies in the body frame. Sidebars, headers and footers that are constant throughout the site don't really factor.
-Ricky
-
Keyword density is a myth. Though if you want a page to show better for the term 'something', at least as far as on-page is concerned, 'something' should show in:
- First in the title tag
- Within the first 50 to 100 words
- In heading(s)
- In the meta description (for CTR)
- Exact match and variants throughout (but only naturally)
- Close with 'something'
While The Googles will sometimes rewrite your titles & meta and include text from a banner or sidebar, they claim to value the part of the page below the banner and next to the sidebar the most. So I wouldn't worry too much about where 'something' is mentioned, unless it's really overdone.
Attorney City - Into INFINITY (or beyond what one may view as tasteful/helpful) - That would be bad.
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
-
I have over 3000 4xx errors on my site for pages that don't exist! Please help!
Hello! I have a new blog that is only 1 month old and I already have over 3000 4xx errors which I've never had on my previous blogs. I ran a crawl on my site and it's showing as my social media links as being indexed as pages. For example, my blog post link is:
Technical SEO | | thebloggersi
https://www.thebloggersincentive.com/blogging/get-past-a-creative-block-in-blogging/
My site is then creating a link like the below:
https://www.thebloggersincentive.com/blogging/get-past-a-creative-block-in-blogging/twitter.com/aliciajthomps0n
But these are not real pages and I have no idea how they got created. I then paid someone to index the links because I was advised by Moz, but it's still not working. All the errors are the same, it's indexing my Twitter account and my Pinterest. Can someone please help, I'm really at a loss with it.
2f86c9fe-95b4-4df5-aeb4-73570881938c-image.png0 -
Ranking for combined version of keyword but not separated version
Hi All, My site is currently ranking on page 1 for the term "golfholidays" but is ranking at the bottom of page 3 for the term I am targeting and have optimised for, which is "golf holidays". Does anyone have any experience with the combined keyword ranking above the singular version? Nowhere on my page doesn't it mention the term "golfholidays" and backlinks to my site mostly use the anchor "golf holdiays" Thanks!
Technical SEO | | Andy94120 -
SEO Troubleshooting? Not ranking in Top 50 for "easy" keyword
Hi there, First of all, thank you in advance to whoever steps in to help me with this issue! So, I have a new site (launched December 2016) in the investing space and have been able to get page 1 rankings on some of my pages. One of my best ranking pages is for the phrase "what is xiv". The Keyword Explorer has this phrase at a 21 difficulty. My page for this keyword is https://www.projectoption.com/what-is-xiv/. The post reached the first page almost immediately after being published, though I know I shouldn't expect this for other keywords of similar difficulty. Here is my problem: I just wrote a comprehensive guide (8,000+ words) on a different keyword phrase: "vertical spreads." The Keyword Explorer has this phrase at a 25 difficulty. My page for this topic: https://www.projectoption.com/vertical-spreads-explained/. However, the page is nowhere to be found in organic Google rankings (not in top 50), and the page has been live for a few weeks now. I've done my best at optimizing the post, but something leads me to believe there are some issues that are beyond my SEO knowledge. For example, maybe the post is too long, and Google can't figure out what the page is about. Any insights would be greatly appreciated. Thank you in advance for your time! -Chris
Technical SEO | | cbutler222930 -
301 Redirect to add juice from Keyword A to Keyword B
Here's our situation: Our company sells Employee HANDBOOKS (the book that explains to employees how the company itself is run, more or less). That's the technically correct term for them. However, many people use this term interchangeably with Employee MANUALS. Employee MANUALS are actually slightly different. (they're more specific, usually a list of common office policies and procedures and how to do them) When doing Keyword research, we learned that many, many people search for Employee MANUALS when they actually are interested in an employee HANDBOOK. We've got our page optimized for the Keyword Employee HANDBOOKS, because in our copy we always refer to it as such. Here's my question: Would it be "cloacking" or some other blackhat nonsense if we did this: #1. Take a copy of the current page, and make a second page for it with a slightly different URL, but optimize the SEO-relevant parts for the phrase Employee MANUAL. #2. That page will also include a 301-redirect towards the original page, which is identical except the SEO bits are optimized for Employee HANDBOOKS. My understanding here is that we'd get the SEO juice from the phrase Employee Manual, without actually having to do the upkeep on two different pages. We also avoid having to have a random page SEO optimized for an improper term just because of the general confusion about what the product is called. Are we on the right track here? Or is this going to annoy Google, or not have the result I'm predicting? Any insight is appreciated!
Technical SEO | | CEDRSolutions0 -
Rel Canonical ? please help again!
Hi, I have been looking at the on page section and the grading. And I have noticed on nearly all of my pages an error. No More Than One Canonical URL Tag Moderate fix <dl> <dt>Number of Canonical tags</dt> <dd>2</dd> <dt>Explanation</dt> <dd>The canonical URL tag is meant to be employed only a single time on an individual URL (much like the title element or meta description). To ensure the search engines properly parse the canonical source, employ only a single version of this tag.</dd> <dt>Recommendation</dt> <dd>Remove all but a single canonical URL tag</dd> </dl> <a class="more expanded">Minimize</a> Please how do I make sure these canonicals are working properly, My rankings are getting worst fro long tail and short tail keywords. I am not even ranking for the main keywords "Probate" at all now! Our site is probate, we sell probate, we talk aout probate and now we are out of the top 200??? http://www.finalduties.co.uk Kind Regards Elissa HAyes
Technical SEO | | Chris__Chris0 -
Order of keyword usage in URL
Hi, I have been wondering for a few weeks if the order of keyword usage for a long tail keyword made a difference. Today I ran an on-page report here for a new page which is a review of a product. The report warned about the keyword usage in URL which made me question my knowledge about this. let's say the page is titled Razer Mouse Review my URL is www.example.com/review/razer-mouse I thought it was a bad idea to repeat the same word in a URL, that's why I categorized all my reviews under review directory and avoided using the word "review" more than once. Should I modify this url and make it www.example.com/review/razer-mouse-review Note: I see the report listed this under "moderate importance factors" and still gave the page A grade. any ideas appreciated!
Technical SEO | | Gamer070 -
Is this keyword strategy totally wrong?
I have a Driving School website www.1stclassdriving.co.uk. The site is structured geographically with one page per Area
Technical SEO | | Brian_Worger
(post code) and one page per Driving Instructor. There are links from each Area page to the instructors
working in the Area. The principal search keyword that I want to optimise on is
"Driving Lessons" The thinking was to target each individual Area page for
"Driving lessons in xxx" where xxx is the particular geographic area
and each particular Instructor to "Driving Lessons in yyy" where yyy
is the main town . The ideal would be that a search on "Driving
Lessons" would pick up the root page - search on an area, say "Driving
Lessons in Croydon" would pick up the Croydon area page and a search on a
town, say "Driving lessons in Mitcham" would pick up the Instructor
that covered that town page. However having read Rebeccas Keyword research guide I am
concerned that this strategy is wrong because of the volume of pages that use
"Driving Lessons in xxxx". Does this fall foul of "Keyword cannibalization" ?
and if so what is the best way of being able to achieve our objective?0