H1 tag found on page, but saying doesn't match keyword
-
We've run a on-page grader test on our home page www.whichledlight.com with the keyword 'led bulbs'
it comes back with saying there is a H1 tag, although the content of the keyword apperently doesn't contain 'led bulbs... which seems a bit odd because the content of the tag is
'UK’s #1 Price Comparison Site for LED Bulbs`
I've used other SEO checkers and some say we don't even have a H1 tag, or H2, H3 and so on for any page.
Screaming Frog seems to think we have a H1 tag though, and can also detect the content of the tag.
Any ideas?
** Update **
The website is a single page app (EmberJS) so we use prerender to create snapshots of the pages.
We were under the impression that MOZ can crawl these prerendered pages fine, so were a bit baffled as to why it would say we have a H1 tag, but think the contents of the tag still doesn't match our keyword. -
I checked the source with my default user agent (in this case Firefox) and did NOT see an H1 tag.
I checked with my user agent set to GoogleBot and DID see an H1 tag, which did have that keyword phrase in it.
I checked again with a default user agent, but this time with JavaScript disabled, and could not see anything at all on the viewable page (blank white page), though the source code was there without the H1 tag.
So it seems to me like you're pre-rendering the page for GoogleBot, and are including the H1 (and other header tags) as part of a fully-rendered page for search engines. However, because that Header tag does not exist if you turn JavaScript off - or if you're not Google - there may be a risk of Google seeing this page as "cloaking".
Pre-rendering is good. It's not a "bad" type of cloaking if you serve the EXACT same page to search engines that you serve to everyone else. Unfortunately, this does not seem to be the case with the way this page is set up. Google sees one thing, other visitors (with or without JavaScript enabled) see something else.
I know developers are head-over-heels for single-page apps and JavaScrpt frameworks, but this stuff is starting to drive me nuts. It's like trying to optimize Flash sites all over again. On the one hand you have Google bragging about how great they are at crawling JavaScript, even going so far as to say pre-rendering is not necessary... And on the other hand there are clear, sustained, organic search traffic drops whenever developers start turning flat HTML/CSS pages into these single-page JavaScript framework applications.
My advice to you is that if you're going to Pre Render a page for Google, to A: make sure the page a user with JavaScript enabled sees is exactly the same as what Google sees, and B: See if you can pre-render pages for visitors without JavaScript enabled as well.
-
Yes, see what you mean.
We get the same if we view source.Inspect element shows it correctly.
I take it you mean SEO checkers are checking the source code.. before JS modifies it?
Do you think this is hurting our SEO?
-
I did a 'View Source' and 'Inspect on your homepage.
On View Source, there was no H1 Tag, however, on Inspect, there is clearly a H1 tag (H2, H3 exist too).
"View Source" typically shows what was received from the server before javascript modifies it. I suspect your developer wrote it this way to optimize for speed (with jQuery).
That being said, when you use the SEO checkers that claims you do not have a H1 tag, they are only reading the document and not the source code.
In short, yes, your website has a H1, H2 and H3 tags.
Just Curious, what results (content of H1) did the on-page grader came out with?
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
-
Ranking Page #1 for Keyword without Hypen, Not at all for Keyword with Hyphen
Hi There! So I work in an industry where there are different conventions for referring to, searching on and spelling the industry name. For example, let's pretend there were a variety of different conventions for referring to the SEO industry. So someone could search for S-EO, SEO, sEO, etc. and those would all be accepted and understood means of referring to the industry. If we use the SEO example as a comparison for our industry, the two most common conventions would be S-EO and SEO. Using this example, we rank on the first page for the term "SEO" but do not rank AT ALL for the term "S-EO". We have a high-value piece of content that is targeted in the following way: "S-EO (SEO): The Basics Guide" so it is more targeted at the hyphenated word but does not rank at all for the hyphenated version, whereas it is page one for the non-hyphenated term. As additional pieces of context: -In general, our site is more targeted at the hyphenated term and there are places where we rank in the top spot for both the hyphenated and non-hyphenated versions. For example, we rank in a top 2 position for both S-EO & SEO software but do not rank at all for the broader "S-EO" term. -There are times when we do appear on page one for the term "S-EO" but it's typically only for a matter or hours or days and then we disappear entirely from the SERPs for that term. We consistently appear for "SEO." -I currently do not believe we are dealing with a penalty of any sort - our link profile is clean and our spam score per Moz is 2 / 17. Any thoughts or ideas as to what is going on here and how we can potentially rank for the term "S-EO?"
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | dpayne10 -
Putting rel=canonical tags on blogpost pointing to product pages
I came across an article mentioning this as a strategy for getting product pages (which are tough to get links for) some link equity. See #21: content flipping: https://www.matthewbarby.com/customer-acquisition-strategies Has anyone done this? Seems like this isn't what the tag is meant for, and Google may see this as deceptive? Any thoughts? Jim
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | jim_shook0 -
How can Google index a page that it can't crawl completely?
I recently posted a question regarding a product page that appeared to have no content. [http://www.seomoz.org/q/why-is-ose-showing-now-data-for-this-url] What puzzles me is that this page got indexed anyway. Was it indexed based on Google knowing that there was once content on the page? Was it indexed based on the trust level of our root domain? What are your thoughts? I'm asking not only because I don't know the answer, but because I know the argument is going to be made that if Google indexed the page then it must have been crawlable...therefore we didn't really have a crawlability problem. Why Google index a page it can't crawl?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | danatanseo0 -
Two pages on same domain - Is this a proper use of the canonical tag?
I have a domain with two pages in question--one is an article with 2,000 words and the other is a FAQ with 300 words. The 300 word FAQ is copied, word-for-word and pasted inside of the 2,000 word article. Would it be a proper use of the canonical tag to point the smaller, 300 word FAQ at the 2,000 word article? Since the 300 word article is identical to a portion of the 2,000 word article, will Google see this as duplicate content? Thanks in advance for any helpful insight.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | andrewv0 -
Lots of city pages - How do I ensure we don't get penalized
We are planning on having a job posting page for each city that we are looking to hire new CFO partners in. But, the problem is, we have LOTS of locations. I was wondering what would be the best way to have similar content on each page (since the job description and requirements are the same for each job posting) without being hit by Google for having duplicate content? One of the main reasons we have decided to have location based pages is that we have noticed visitors to our site are searching for "cfo job in [location] but we notice that most of these visitors then leave. We believe it to be because the pages they land on make no mention of the location that they were looking for and is a little incongruent with what they were expecting. We are looking to use the following URLs and TItle/Description as an example: | http://careers.b2bcfo.com/cfo-jobs/Alabama/Birmingham | CFO Careers in Birmingham, AL | | Are you looking for a CFO Career in Birmingham, Alabama ? We're looking for partners there. Apply today! | | Any advice you have for this would be greatly appreciated. Thank you.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | B2B.CFO0 -
Will Google read my page title and H1?
Dim strTitle : strTitle = "The Title Of My Page" <title>Company name - <%=strTitle%></title> <%=strTitle%> Will Google be able to read this? When I view source the relevant information is in the tags but I'm wondering if Google hates this or not? Cheers!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Hughescov0 -
Do I need a canonical tag on the 404 error page?
Per definition, a 404 is displayed for different url (any not existing url ...). As I try to clean my website following SEOmoz pro advices, SEOmoz notify me of duplicate content on urls leading to a 404 🙂 This is I guess not that important, but just curious: should we add a cononical tag to the template returning the 404, with a canonical url such as www.mysite.com/404 ?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | nuxeo0 -
Do in page links pointing to the parent page make the page more relevant for that term?
Here's a technical question. Suppose I have a page relevant to the term "Mobile Phones". I have a piece of text, on that page talking about "mobile phones", and within that text is the term "cell phones". Now if I link the text "cell phones", to the page it is already placed on (ie the parent page) - will the page gain more relevancy for the term "cell phones"?? Thanks
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | James770