URL Structure's Effect on SEO
-
Hello all,
I have a client who currently has a very poor URL structure. As it stands, their URLs are formatted in the following manner:
http://www.domain.com/category/subcategory/page
In all my years of SEO, however, I have always tried to implement the following format:
http://www.domain.com/category/page
The web designer for this particular project has been very reluctant to change the structure for obvious reasons, but I'm convinced that by modifying the URL structure, SEO will improve.
I am correct in thinking this?
Likewise, if I am able to get the URL structure changed, what do I need to look out for to make sure we don't lose any traction for our keyword terms?
Any and all insight/suggestions is greatly appreciated. Thanks for reading!
-
Hi J.P.,
Page depth refers to the number of clicks it takes a user (or search engine) to get to a page from the home page. And yes, this can negatively impact SEO, as well as usability, if it takes too many clicks for users and search engines to get to a page. (Search engines may use up their crawl budget, while users may simply leave your site and go to one that is easier to find what the are looking for.)
However, the number of clicks it takes to navigate to a page doesn't necessarily mirror the URL structure. So, in the example you give, the existing URL makes sense - http://www.domain.com/procedures/breasts/augmentation. It is readable, includes keywords, does not use special characters, avoid stop words, and isn't too long.
If you were going to change the URL structure, I would go with http://www.domain.com/procedures/breastaugmentation over http://www.domain.com/breastaugmentation, unless the only procedure your client does is breast augmentation. But, seeing as there is not a compelling reason to change the URL structure, I would leave it as-is. Even if you perfectly plan and execute all 301-redirects and update every link, you are creating a lot of work for yourself (as well as anyone who links to you, as best practice would be to ask them to update the new link). Furthermore, 301-redirects are known to pass slightly less value over time. Of immediate concern, you should expect fluctuations in the site's performance in the SERPs when making any sitewide change such as this.
For more information on best practices for URL structure, I recommend checking out this post by Rand Fishkin: <a>https://moz.com/blog/15-seo-best-practices-for-structuring-urls</a>.
I hope that helps!
Christy
-
Christy,
So my client is a plastic surgeon and the URLs have the following structure: http://www.domain.com/procedures/breasts/augmentation
however, most of her competitor's URL structure follows a much different format. Generally, their site pages are either:
1. http://www.domain.com/breastaugmentation, or
2. http://www.domain.com/procedures/breastaugmentation
I was just thinking that because the page is so 'deep', search engines might have a difficult time finding it. Likewise, I was under the impression that by separating the URL like this: /procedures/breasts/augmentation, the SEs may have a hard time discerning whether the page is related to augmentation (as a generalized term) or something completely different. I hope I'm making sense.
-
Hi J.P., you've received some solid advice from Bob. Like he said, though, it is difficult from the example given to tell if your suggested approach is solid. However, detailed answers to these 2 questions should help us get a clearer picture of the situation:
1. Why do you think the existing URL structure is a poor one?
2. Why do you think the proposed one would be more effective for this particular site in terms of SEO performance?
And, of course, if you are able to provide examples of URLs that provide a bit more detail (and show any differences between the existing and proposed URL structure beyond the addition of a subfolder), that would be great, too!
Looking forward to hearing from you,
Christy
-
HI J.P.,
When chancing URL’s always keep the redirecting (301) in mind.
About the URL structure:
From this example I can’t tell you if you’re right or wrong about your approach. In general I think about the following things while I format URL structures:
- If I would read this URL in the SERP’s, is it clear on what section of the website I enter?
- Does it contain any keywords?
- Doesn’t it repeat any words?
- Isn’t the URL too long / hard to read?
Depending on those criteria I decide on the amount of folders in an website. For example, I own an review website which has an URL structure of /industry/city/company. Three layers, but the make sense to me.
I 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
-
Missing trailing slash in URL on subpages resulting in Moz PA of 1
Even here in moz community I am noticing it. Is it really a factor to have an ending slash on the page? Does it make a difference? Our website has a homepage PA of 63, DA of 56 but all of our sub-pages are just 1 and they have been up for 4 months.
Web Design | | serverleap1 -
Google Translate with "no-follow" just for users' use, no ranking
Hello, I tried to search but here is a little unique situation. I would like to translate my website in 2-3 different languages not for ranking purpose, but only for some minority users within Italy to understand the content in their native language. Using "no-follow" with a Google Translate link would damage SEO? if not I would like to use it. Here are few points: Give users the ability to switch the content to their language with a link Tell Google not to follow the translated pages, because I don't want them to be used for ranking or searches I would start simply with Google Translate to see if people actually are interested, then later translate by human but still don't want google to follow I could also start with human translation instead of Google Translate if really needed, I know it is a no no. What I'm very interested is to make sure that those pages under "no-follow" won't affect my SEO in good or bad right now, because we would like to keep as it is. Thanks a lot
Web Design | | angelowei0 -
Do you know any tool(s) to check if Google can crawl a URL?
Our site is currently blocking search bots that's why I can't use Google Webmaster Tools' URL fetch tool. In Screamingfrog, there are dynamic pages that can't be found if I crawl the homepage. Thanks in advance!
Web Design | | esiow20130 -
On site SEO opinions
Hi all, I have been testing different configurations for my on-site SEO for a while now and I think I am pretty much there. However it is always nice to know what other SEO's think about my keyword density and usage. My site is http://www.tomlondonmagic.com I am curious as to what you think regarding landing page content, whether you need lots or text or little text? I have just removed links in the text as I feel I want to keep as much juice on my landing page as possible. Thanks all!
Web Design | | TomLondon0 -
Comparing the site structure/design of my live site to my new design
Hi SEOmoz team, for the last few months I've been working on a new design for my website, the old, live design can be viewed at http://www.concerthotels.com - it is primarily focused on helping users find hotels close to concert venues throughout North America. The old structure was built in such a way that each concert venue had a number of different pages associated with it (all connected via tabs) - a page with information about the venue, a page with nearby hotels to the venue, a page of upcoming events, a page of venue reviews. An example of these pages can be seen at: http://www.concerthotels.com/venue/madison-square-garden/304484 http://www.concerthotels.com/venue-hotels/madison-square-garden-hotels/304484 http://www.concerthotels.com/venue-events/madison-square-garden-events/304484 http://www.concerthotels.com/venue-reviews/madison-square-garden-reviews/304484 The /venue-hotels/ pages are the most important pages on my website - and there is one of these pages for each concert venue - they are the landing pages for about 90% of the traffic on the website. I decided that having four pages for each venue was probably a poor design, since many of the pages ended up having little or no useful, unique content. So my new design attempts to bring a lot of the venue information together into fewer pages. My new website redesign is temporarily situated at: (not currently launched to the public) http://www.concerthotels.com/frontend The equivalent pages for Madison Square Garden are now: http://www.concerthotels.com/frontend/venue/madison-square-garden/304484 (the page above contains venue information, events and reviews) and http://www.concerthotels.com/frontend/venue-hotels/madison-square-garden-hotels/304484 I would really appreciate any feedback from you guys, based on what you think of the new site design compared to the old design from an SEO point of view. Of course, any feedback on site speed, easy of use etc compared to the old design would also be greatly appreciated. 🙂 My main fear is that when I launch the new design (the new URLs will be identical to the old ones), Google will take a dislike to it - I currently receive a large percentage of my traffic through Google organic search, so I don't want to launch a design that might damage that traffic. My gut instinct tells me that Google should prefer the new design - vastly reduced number of pages, each page now contains more unique content, and it's very much designed for users, so I'm hoping bounce rate, conversion etc will improve too. But my gut has been wrong in the past! 🙂 But I'd love to hear your thoughts, and thanks in advance for any feedback, Cheers Mike
Web Design | | mjk260 -
'Increase in soft 404 errors' Webmasters notification. What to do?
I've received a Webmasters notification about an 'increase in soft 404 errors'. When we had the new site launched three months ago we did away with some old pages, which we either 301 to new equivalents, or, we return a 'Oops, that page seems to be missing' 404 page which has some links to important parts on the site that might be of use to the visitor. Any ideas why Webmasters is issuing the warning? Any suggestions as to what to do? Thanks
Web Design | | Martin_S0 -
Does redesigning a website affects SEO results
We have a website and we are getting good traffic to it. Its a travel related domain registered many years back. Now its ranking high for most of the potential keywords even if it is not at all SEO friendly (Domain is an exact match keyword). We are planning to redesign it. Will that affect the SEO Ranking? We need to ask some more doubts: 1. When redesigning we are planning to change the inner page URL. So it it wise to redirect (301) old URL to the new URL? Old url will not be there after redesigning. But its currently having page ranks. 2. Can we redirect more than one old url to a single new page? 3. Google new updates said "they will be going to diminish the exact match results domains". Does that updates affects us? 4. Any more suggestions for the redesigning?
Web Design | | jjv0 -
Javascript changing URL - Thoughts?
So, our developer just created a player at the bottom of this site I work for. It's not really important what it is. The thing is, when you go to our home page now, the javascript changes the url from www.site.com to www.site.com/home It's not actually redirected or anything (no 301, it's just the javascript doing this), but I'm worried that if someone links back to our site they're going to surely pull that URL to point back to, which is wrong. Also, when you go to a category, the URL changes from www.site.com/category to www.site.com/home#category. Again, it's not a redirect but I'm still worried people will link back to this since it's on the entire site now... I'm suggesting that we turn off this new feature until we find a workaround. I just wanted to confirm with you guys that this is best. Thanks
Web Design | | poolguy0