How to choose the best canonical URL
-
In a duplicate content situation, and assuming that both rel=canonical and a 301 redirect pass link equity (I know there is still some speculation on this), how should you choose the "best" version of the URL to establish as the redirect target or authoritative URL?
For example, we have a series of duplicate pages on our site. Typically we choose the "cleanest" or shortest non-trailing-slash version of the URL as the canonical, but what if those pages are already established and have varying page authority/backlink profiles? The URLs are:
example.com/stores/locate/index?parameters=tags - PA = 54, Inbound Links = 259
example.com/stores/locate/index - PA = 60, Inbound Links = 302
example.com/stores/ - This is the version that currently ranks. PA = 42, Inbound Links = 3
example.com/stores - PA = 40, Inbound Links = 8
This might not really even matter, but in the interests of conserving as much SEO value as possible, which would you choose as either the 301 redirect target and/or the canonical version? My gut is to go with the URL that's already ranking (example.com/stores/) but curious if PA, backlinks, and trailing slashes should be considered also.
We of course would not 301 the URL with the tracking parameters.
Thanks for your help!
-
I like to keep the canonical neat so it looks better in the serps so as to encourage future users to click on it (people like clean, readable URLs), so I try not to use unnecessarily complex URLs. I have had very good luck in canonicalizing messy URLs with decent authority to new, completely non-ranking but clean, URLs and not only keeping but growing page authority.
And I have a fairly large site which is crawled regularly so I do value consistency--whichever page is set as the canonical will eventually become the ranking page, so current rank is not the biggest issue to me. In the long run, consistency will make your life (and the life of anyone who follows you in your present position) easier. (That being said, it wouldn't hurt anything if you prefer to use what is currently ranking.)
-
Thanks Linda! With regards to the trailing slash, typically we do set the non-trailing slash version as the canonical version across our site. So in this case, would you recommend that we stick with the non-trailing slash version for consistency's sake, even if it seems like it has lower SEO value?
Or would you go with the trailing slash version since it's the one currently ranking, and seems to have the more value; or even the longer URL with the highest PA/backlinks?
Thanks again!
-
In general, you will get the most links to a page via whatever URL is easiest for the linker to grab, so often it is not the prettiest, with parameters and such. But you really don't want that showing up in the serps, so don't use that as a canonical.
As far as the trailing slash/no slash issue, most people will use the no slash version if they are choosing how to add a link, even when the slash version would be more correct (as in your example) so you would also expect to see more links there.
But you mention that the slash version is the ranking version in your example. Is this mostly true throughout the site? (Maybe it is a Wordpress site that ends everything with slashes?) Then I'd stick with that. (I myself use the rule you first mentioned, the cleanest, non-slash version, but my site doesn't use trailing forward slashes.)
Do keep it consistent though. It would be a pain to always be checking pages to see what the canonical should be. The amount of SEO value you might lose is minimal.
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
-
Unsolved Moz Pro crawl signaling missing canonical which are not?
Hi,
Moz Pro | | rolandvintners
I'm trying MozPro considering using it.
One of the tool which is appealing is the crawl and insights.
After quick use, I really question many of the alerts, for instance, I got a "missing canonical tag" on this url: https://vintners.co/wine/grawu_gto#2020 but when I check my markup, there's clearly a canonical tag: <link rel="canonical" href="https://vintners.co/wine/grawu_gto"> Anybody can explain?
I asked Moz Pro staff when being onboarded but didn't get an answer...
Honestly, I'm questioning the value of these crawls, or may be I miss something?0 -
Facebook URLs, Anchor Text
I have a client that is considering a facebook url change. For ease of explanation, let's say their currently existing URL is facebook.com/Company123. I've googled their currently existing facebook url and found a dozen or so websites that include the text, "facebook.com/Company123". But, these results don't include websites that have an anchor text of, for example, "Facebook" and a link pointing to facebook.com/Company123. Has anybody had success tracking down any/all websites that point to a specific Facebook url? I've tried Open Site Explorer, OpenLinkprofiler, RankSignals, and SEO SpyGlass to no avail. Thank you!
Moz Pro | | OMTAnno0 -
Duplicate URLs
A campaign that I ran said that my client's site had some 47,000+ duplicate pages and titles. I was wondering how I can possibly set that many 301 redirects, but a Moz help engineer said it has a lot to do with session IDs. See this set of duplicate URLs: http://www.lumberliquidators.com/ll/c/engineered-hardwood-flooring (clearly the main URL for the page)
Moz Pro | | AlanJacob
http://www.lumberliquidators.com/ll/c/engineered-hardwood-flooring?PIPELINE_SESSION_ID=0ac00a2e0ad53eb90cb0b0304d178fc1
http://www.lumberliquidators.com/ll/c/engineered-hardwood-flooring?PIPELINE_SESSION_ID=0ac3039d0ad4af2720b3ccd2238547ab
http://www.lumberliquidators.com/ll/c/engineered-hardwood-flooring?PIPELINE_SESSION_ID=0ac071ed0ad4af292684b0746931158f To a crawler, that looks like 4 different pages, when it's clear that they're actually all different URLs for the same page. I was wondering if some of you, maybe with experience in site architecture, would have insight into how to address this issue? Thanks Alan0 -
Best Chrome extension to find contact emails on a website
Hi, I've done some digging around the Q and A and SEOMoz articles. Â Still not finding exactly what I need. I'm just looking for a tool that will quickly help me find the best contact email on a particular website. Â Whether it be the one the site is registered to a different one or both. Thanks in advance for the help. Aaron
Moz Pro | | arkana0 -
Dead links-urls
What is the quickest way to get Google to clean up dead
Moz Pro | | 1step2heaven
link? I have 74,000 dead links reported back, i have added a robot txt to
disallow and added on Google list remove from my webmaster tool 4 months ago.
The same dead links also show on the open site explores. Thanks0 -
URLs getting re-directed to double http:// URLs
The "Notices" section under "Crawl Diagnostics" shows that there are 435 issues on my website. I checked out a few URLs to verify this issue and found that most of these pages are working perfectly. For instance, the above mentioned report shows that http://policycomplaints.com/about redirects to http://http://policycomplaints.com/about/ . Then, http://policycomplaints.com/aegon-religare/mis-selling-of-policy-by-aegon-religare/ redirects to http://http://policycomplaints.com/aegon-religare/mis-selling-of-policy-by-aegon-religare/ . However, when I open these pages, they seem to be working perfectly. I didn't find them getting re-directed to somewhere else. So, as per the report, it seems that all of these 435 http://URLs are getting re-directed to http://http://URL versions which in reality is not true because all the http://URLs are working perfectly. So, is this a problem with SEOmoz software? If not, what is the reason for these issues and how can I adddress them. Do notify if any further information is required for the same. Thanks. bNiEm.png
Moz Pro | | unknownID10 -
What is the quickest way to get OSE data for many URLs all at once?
I have over 400 URLs in a spreadsheet and I would like to get Open Site Explorer data (domain/page authority/trust etc) for each URL. Would I use the Linkscape API to do this quickly (ie not manually entering every single site into OSE)? Or is there something in OSE or a tool I am overlooking? And whatever the best process is, can you give a brief overview? Thanks!! -Dan
Moz Pro | | evolvingSEO0 -
Best directory submittal program? Or at least a comprehensive list of non-spammy directories somewhere?
There's a ton of directories. Has anyone had success with a program that will take your info for a site and submit it to all of them at once? Bonus points if you can vary the anchor text and description. Paid or free. And whether there is anything like that, which actually works, I am wondering if there is some relatively authoritative, relatively comprehensive list of non-spammy directories. Any other directory advice would be awesome! Thanks!
Moz Pro | | TheEspresseo1