Can a page be 100% topically relevant to a search query?
-
Today's YouMoz post, Accidental SEO Tests: When On-Page Optimization Ceases to Matter, explores the theory that there is an on-page optimization saturation point, "beyond which further on-page optimization no longer improves your ability to rank" for the keywords/keyword topics you are targeting. In other words, you can optimize your page for search to the point that it is 100% topically relevant to query and intent.
Do you believe there exists such a thing as a page that is 100% topically relevant? What are your thoughts regarding there being an on-page optimization saturation point, beyond which further on-page optimization no longer improves your ability to rank? Let's discuss!
-
I consider 100% match purely as theoretically possible. In my modest opinion the visitor determines the relevancy of the landingpage. And it is Google's nobel job to serve the visitor with a page that fits his needs. But in this case no page can be fully satisfying to everybody, due to different search intentions with the same keyword.
When you achieve a high conversion on your page you'v probably written a very relevant page. So let the visitor truly find what he is looking for and Google will notice....
-
Well said, Russ, especially for a "mathy" answer. I am curious, though, would this "ideal document" you describe have a specific word count?
-
Warning, mathy answer follows. This is a generic description of what is going on, not exact, but hopefully understandable.
Yes, there is some theoretical page that is 100% topically relevant if you had a copy of the "ideal document" produced by the topical relevancy model. This would not look like a real page, though. It would look like a jumble of words in ideal relation and distance to one another. However, most topic models are built using sampling and, more importantly, the comparative documents that are used to determine the confidence level that your document's relevancy is non-random is also sampled. This means that there is some MoE (Margin of Error).
As you and your competitors approach 100% topical relevancy, that Margin of Error likely covers the difference. If you are 99.98% relevant, and they are 99.45% relevant, but the MoE is 1%, then a topical relevancy system cant conclude with certainty that you are more relevant than they are.
At this point, the search model would need to rely on other metrics, like authority, over relevance to differentiate the two pages.
-
With the pace at which things are changing and throwing in machine learning in to the ranking factor, I would say it's close to impossible to have 100% topically relevancy for any good period of time.
-
100% saturation is impossible to achieve while maintaining any semblance of value. Not only because any proper page inherently has navigation, internal linkage, and myriad other elements, but because to write content about a subject in that amount of detail, one would invariably need to write about sub-topics and related topics. It's just not feasible. But, and here's the kicker, you wouldn't want 100% saturation anyway.
Rich, dynamic content incorporates that which is related to it. Strong pages link out to others, and keep visitors within their media cycle, if not churning them lower down. Good content is content that holds information that's both detailed and general to a topic. I would say, at most, the highest saturation point that still remains within strong SEO and content optimization is about 85-90% when taking into account all page content - and even that's pushing it, really.
-
I would agree to a point. At its heart, Google probably uses some form of numerical score for a page as it relates to a query. If a page is a perfect match, it scores 100%. I would also suggest that attaining a perfect score is a virtual impossibility.
The scoring system, however, is dynamic. The page may be perfect for a particular query only at a particular point in time.
- Google's algorithm changes daily. What's perfect today may not be perfect tomorrow.
- Semantic search must be dynamic. If Google discovers a new Proof Term or Relevant Term related to the query, and the page in question doesn't contain that term, the page is no longer perfect.
These are only a couple of examples.
For practical purposes, the amount of testing, research, etc. to achieve a perfect score at some point delivers diminishing returns. The amount of effort required to push a page from 95% to 100% isn't worth the effort, especially since Google's algorithm is a secret.
Sometimes good is good enough.
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
-
Still no good search results after 2 months of indexation
Hi guys, One of our website (https://www.residentiebosrand.be/) has been online for about two months. It's indexed and Google shows search results. But the website is not ranking on the keywords it's supposed to be ranking: 'residentie bosrand'. How come we still don't find the website on the first pages in the search results, while these are the main keywords on the website's URL, page, ... ? Best regards,
Algorithm Updates | | conversal0 -
Software to indicate search volumes/trends
Is there any software that exists to help provide an indication of the search volumes or trends behind keywords? Currently we use google trends for a YOY and WOW view for some select KW's but the reality is are search volumes are effected by 1,000's of KW's and trying to get an accurate view of overall trends and theme with our product sector is difficult. I'm interested to find out if there is software which is an alternative to google trends or if there is 3rd party software available that lets us process google trends data in bulk?
Algorithm Updates | | SEO-SMB0 -
Reasons for a sharp decline in pages crawled
Hello! I have a site I've been tracking using Moz since July. The site is mainly stagnant with some on page content updates. Starting the first week of December, Moz crawler diagnostics showed that the number of pages crawled decreased from 300 to 100 in a week. So did the number of errors through. So crawler issues went from 275 to 50 and total pages crawled went from 190 to 125 in a week and this number has stayed the same for the last 5 weeks. Are the drops a red flag? Or is it ok since errors decreased also? Has anyone else experienced this and found an issue? FYI: sitemap exists and is submitted via webmaster tools. GWT shows no crawler errors nor blocked URLs.
Algorithm Updates | | Symmetri0 -
Are localised results affecting search query volumes?
As the questions says. I've had some conversations with colleagues of mine and they definitely feel that search query volumes are being heavily affected by localised results - and even more so recently. So, for instance, you may have a Google UK rank of 3 for a keyword yet be hardly visible in other parts of the UK because of the localised-based results. Thoughts?
Algorithm Updates | | Webrevolve0 -
New visual search results - what is this and how do we optimize for it?
Hi all, This morning as I am doing some keyword research for a new client, I typed in the phrase and Google returned both the listings as well as a vertical photo bar. I've never seen this before. Is this new? Is it common and I've just missed it? I presume this means we need to really have our photo alt tags 'ducks in a row' but I'm also wondering if this points to an increased importance on visual content? Image attached. Thanks, YINd14d
Algorithm Updates | | EricOliver0 -
How could Penguin kill my top ten rank and promote this garbage page to a #5 spot
Hey, Before penguin, I had a #9 rank for the term "yoga poses". So as many of us are doing, I started looking at my link profile... and yes, there were around 300 links from an old yoga news website (anchor: yoga poses)... that lead to the page on my site optimized for this term. The problem is they took the site down, but not properly... I.E. they generate a "not available" message for browsers, but underneath, I guess the bots can still index all the pages... so I guess they were interpreting these links as coming from a cloaked site. So, I was able to get them to remove the links... webmaster tools reports half of them gone now. What I don't get though... is how Google can give this garbage page a #5 spot for a competitive term like "yoga poses"... Check out http://www.ebmyoga.com/beginyoga.html and compare it to my page... http://www.yogaclassplan.com/yoga-poses/ This page leads to highly quality 100% unique yoga pose articles... in my mind we deliver so much more value than the site with a #5 rank. I don't understand. Any insight? Thanks,
Algorithm Updates | | biomat0 -
Is it ok to repeat part of a meta-description across multiple pages?
For example, what if I was to conclude each meta-description tag with the line... "Free shipping for orders over $90." The rest of the meta-description tag on every page is unique, but the last sentence would be the same or at least similar. Thoughts?
Algorithm Updates | | B-man0 -
Sitelinks Query
Hello fellow Mozzers, first of please go easy on me as this is my first ever post ! I have a question regarding Sitelinks. Obviously I am pleased to have 8 Sitelinks now appearing in my GWT account. However one of my sitelinks has an obscure title of 'FIRST' which to the person searching will mean nothing - the actual link to one of my site pages is a good one and i dont really want to 'block' it in GWT and just wondered if anyone had any ideas what might be driving Google to 'auto-detect' the word 'First' for the link in question. The following 'google search example' link will show you what i mean http://www.google.com/search?q=where2stay&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-GB:official&client=firefox-a My result is the first one on the list. Any help from fellow mozzers is much appreciated. Many thanks
Algorithm Updates | | SamanthaRiggien0