Anchor Text and over optimization
-
Hello everyone,
I would like to have your expert (hopefully) opinion on one thing: I am working on a specifi page of a pretty big site, and I noticed one thing in particular. This page is linked to from a lots of internal pages (which is ok) but the anchor text used is in most cases the exact keyword they would like to rank for. I know this is not generally a good thing, but I guess they have so many links with that particular anchor because of the breadcrumbs, and this actually makes sense. Now, if this is the case, how could we work this out (if this is an issue)? Or probably this is not an issue since those links don’t carry a lot of SEO weight…don’t know.
Thanks for your opinion on this
-
Hi Brendan!
The post you linked is really interesting! Thanks! There are so much info out there that it’s quite easy to miss the good stuff
Yep, and for the on-page grader I already checked that one: A
Thank you very much for your kind help
-
Hi Parodi,
Including your targeted keywords in your URL is definitely recommended. As a general rule, people should be able to read the URL and understand what the page is about before clicking. Pete Meyers wrote a great post on this a few years back but all of the information in it is still very much valid today.
One really important thing to note - if you do change your URLs to include your targeted keywords (and there's no real reason you shouldn't), remember to redirect the old versions properly using 301 redirects.
One final thing you might want to try if you haven't already is Moz's On-Page Grader Tool which will look at important on-page ranking factors for your targeted search term and give you a list of things you can do to improve the relevancy of the page.
-
HI guys, thank you very much for your kind help. Yes the anchor is perfectly natural, and it makes sense that a link from the footer is not seen as an over optimization, otherwise all big sites should have this issue However, I already did an analysis of the competitors considering A LOT of things and our site, at least on paper, should rank higher (and I took into consideration not just what was on the moz report but html errors, page speed, word count and so on…pretty through). There are things that can be done to improve the page optimization, but what is interesting, is that all the pages that are outranking us have some sort of keyword variation in the URL. I thought the keyword in the URL was not a big deal, but if that’s the case, well, it kind of gets confusing with everyone saying that keywords in the URL are not important. Do you have any experience on this? Not sure if I can share the URL but in case I can, I will Thank you so very much!
-
Howdy,
This all really depends on what the anchor text being used is and how natural it sounds. For example, if it's a service such as car insurance that your site offers, using 'car insurance' as the anchor text would make complete sense as this is how the service is referred to. However, if it's something more long tail than this - car insurance California, for example, it would look unnatural and would not be recommended.
Are you able to share the URL for the page you're working on so we can take a closer look? Feel free to send me a PM if you'd prefer.
Another thing you could do is to look at your competitors in the SERPs for your targeted term(s) and see what they're doing. Open Site Explorer's Anchor Text tool is a great way to look at internal links pointing to a particular page so you can get a really good idea of what others are doing.
-
Well, ideal case is variety of anchors, but you are speaking about internal links so i dont think it´s a big problem.
Problematic would be if those links with same achors would be external links
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
-
Category text not present in mobile version
Hey guys! I am looking into a site that has multiple category pages. These have descriptions that include relevant KWs. However, the text appears only on the desktop version, not on mobile. If I inspect the page, I still see the text's html tags. The site has been indexed by the smartphone google bot. Is there a chance the text's KWs are being detected by Google? I would think adding the text is the ideal route, but I´d like to see what you think. Thanks!
Technical SEO | | Reprise0 -
How handle pages with "read more" text query strings?
My site has hundreds of keyword content landing pages that contain one or two sections of "read more" text that work by calling the page and changing a ChangeReadMore variable. This causes the page to currently get indexed 5 times (see examples below plus two more with anchor tag set to #sectionReadMore2 This causes Google to include the first version of the page which is the canonical version and exclude the other 4 versions of the page. Google search console says my site has 4.93K valid pages and 13.8K excluded pages. My questions are: 1. Does having a lot of excluded pages which are all copies of included pages hurt my domain authority or otherwise hurt my SEO efforts? 2. Should I add a rel="nofollow" attribute to the read more link? If I do this will Google reduce the number of excluded pages? 3. Should I instead add logic so the canonical tag displays the exact URL each time the page re-displays in another readmore mode? I assume this would increase my "included pages" and decrease the number of "excluded pages". Would this somehow help my SEO efforts? EXAMPLE LINKS https://www.tpxonline.com/Marketplace/Used-AB-Dick-Presses-For-Sale.asp https://www.tpxonline.com/Marketplace/Used-AB-Dick-Presses-For-Sale.asp?ChangeReadMore=More#sectionReadMore1 https://www.tpxonline.com/Marketplace/Used-AB-Dick-Presses-For-Sale.asp?ChangeReadMore=Less#sectionReadMore1
Technical SEO | | DougHartline0 -
Hi! I'm wondering whether for keyword SEO - a url should be www.salshoes.com/shoes/mens/day-wear (so with a few parent categories) or www.salshoes.com/shoes-mens-day-wear is ok for on page optimization?
Hi! I'm wondering whether for keyword SEO - a url should be www.salshoes.com/shoes/mens/day-wear (so with a few parent categories) or www.salshoes.com/shoes-mens-day-wear is ok for on page optimization? Hi! I'm wondering whether for keyword SEO - a url should be www.salshoes.com/shoes/mens/day-wear (so with a few parent categories) or www.salshoes.com/shoes-mens-day-wear is ok for on page optimization?
Technical SEO | | SalSantaCruz0 -
What are some best practices for optimizing alternate versions of a brand name?
What are the best methods for ensuring that the correct spelling/formatting of a brand name rank in the SERP when an alternate formatting/spelling of the brand name is searched. Take for example the brand name (made up for example purposes), "SuperFry". Many customers search using the term "Super Fry" (with a space). To make things worse, not only does Google not return the brand name SuperFry, but it also auto corrects to another brand name "Super-Fri". Is there a common best practice to ensure the customer finds the intended brand name when they simply add a space in the search term? I assume a quick fix would be to create an ad words campaign for the alternate spellings/formatting. What about an organic solution? Perhaps we could create a special page talking about the alternate ways to spell the brand name? Would this solution send mixed signals to Google and potential hurt the over all rankings? Thanks much for any advice!
Technical SEO | | Vspeed0 -
Can Silos and Exact Anchor Text In Links Hurt a Site Post Penguin?
Just got a client whose site dropped from a PR of 3 to zero. This happened shortly after the Penguin release, June, 2012. Examining the site, I couldn't find any significant duplicate content, and where I did find duplicate content (9%), a closer look revealed that the duplication was totally coincidental (common expressions). Looking deeper, I found no sign of purchased links or linking patterns that would hint at link schemes, no changes to site structure, no change of hosting environment or IP address. I also looked at other factors, too many to mention here, and found no evidence of black hat tactics or techniques. The site is structured in silos, "services", "about" and "blog". All page titles that fall under services are categorized (silo) under "services", all blog entries are categorized under "blogs", and all pages with company related information are categorized under "about". When exploring the site's links in Site Explorer (SE), I noticed that SE is identifying the "silo" section of links (i.e. services, about, blog, etc.) and labeling it as an anchor text. For example, domain.com/(services)/page-title, where the page title prefix (silo), "/services/", is labeled as an anchor text. The same is true for "blog" and "about". BTW, each silo has its own navigational menu appearing specifically for the content type it represents. Overall, though there's plenty of room for improvement, the site is structured logically. My question is, if Site Explorer is picking up the silo (services) and identifying it as an anchor text, is Google doing the same? That would mean that out of the 15 types of service offerings, all 15 links would show as having the same exact anchor text (services). Can this type of site structure (silo) hurt a website post Penguin?
Technical SEO | | UplinkSpyder0 -
Google Website Optimizer
So if you are AB testing two pages: index.html and indexB.html Shouldn't I nofollow indexB.html? It has all the same content, just a different design.
Technical SEO | | tylerfraser0 -
Internal anchor text
Designed my website with one keyword, one page adage. Wondering if i am creating an issue with internal anchor text and use of plurals for keywords. For instance, say I want my index page to rank for keyword exotic vacations, and an inner page to rank for exotic vacation. I do this as i notice there is a major discrepency with google when calling both the singular and plural term of certain keywords (like the example above, for instance). I see in yahoo it views singular and plural as essentially the same word, but google appears to rank them separately. Anyways since google is where the majority of my search traffic comes from, I separated my most competitive keywords for both singular and plural usage and created external links with anchor text that reflects this separation. I am concerned though that I may not be handling the Internal anchor text properly. What i have done is take a keyword l want to rank for (for example "exotic vacations") and attach it a page (for example index page) and use the anchor text "exotic vacations" on this page and link it to the inner page "exotic vacation." Reason: I want to rank for the term exotic vacations on the main page, but have a relavant page to link to this term so the closest would be the keyword exotic vacation on an inner page. I would appreciate any feedback on this. I think I am running into a problem with this strategy especially on the main index page/inner page keywords (plural to singular). I also notice google will find an inner page for a time then switch it to the default domain name index page when searchign for a keyword. Kinda keeps going back and forth. I never see any indent search results.
Technical SEO | | oxygenretreat0