Are SEO Friendly URLS Less Important Now That Google Is Indexing Breadcrumb Markup?
-
Hi Moz Community and staffers,
Would appreciate your thoughts on the following question:
**Are SEO friendly URLS less important now that Google is indexing breadcrumb markup in both desktop and mobile search? **
Background that inspired the question:
Our ecommerce platform's out of the box functionality has very limited "friendly url" settings and would need some development work to setup an alias for more friendly URLS. Meanwhile, the breadcrumb markup is implemented correctly and indexed so it seems there's no longer an argument for improved CTR with SEO friendly URLS .
With that said I'm having a hard time justifying the URL investment, as well as the 301 redirect mapping we would need to setup, and am wondering if more friendly URLs would lead to a significant increase in rankings for level of effort? Sidenote: We already rank well for non-brand and branded searches since we are brand manufacturer with an ecommerce presence.
Our breadcrumbs are much cleaner & concise than our URL structure. Here are a couple examples.
Category URL: http://www.mysite.com/browse/category1/subcat2/subcat3/_/N-7th
Breadcrumb: www.mysite.com > category1 > subcat2 > subcat3Product URL: http://www.mysite.com/product/product-name/_/R-133456E112
Breadcrumb: www.mysite.com > category1 > subcat2 > subcat3 > product nameThe "categories" contain actual keywords just hiding them here in the example. According to my devs they can't get rid of the "_" but could possible replace it with a letter. Also they said it's an easier fix to make the URLs always lower case. Lastly some of our product URLS contain non-standard characters in the product name like "." and "," which is also a simpler fix according to my developers.
Looking forward to your thoughts on the topic!
Jesse
-
Thanks - good question. I agree with a previous poster that any website should possess friendly URL'S, such is a given these days and ultimately aids user awareness and navigation. You really should carefully research and think about the time required for URLS rewrites - these can be quit dangerous and if not done properly can damage your rankings. Certainly breadcrumb trails are a big plus so that's something I would definitely recommend.
-
Hi Jesse
Google reading breadcrumbs is not really a new thing, its been around for years, i remember "optimizing" my breadcrumbs in 2009 to get the perfect "green breadcrumbs" on the results pages.
Friendly URLs are not used solo for SEO optimization, you should have user-friendly URLs regardless to your optimization efforts. It is one of the elements that users do pay attention. This being said, you will find enourmous amount websites ranking for very competitive keywords with URLs not even containing the keyword within the uri.
for example: xxx.com/product/t/121kl?sku=28971723dsa-black.
In my opinion having a friendly URL is important, it is one of the hundreds of ranking factors. The catch is that every other SEO expert puts a different weight on certain factors. There are many other ranking factors way more important then the friendly URL. I believe that every single factor is important, because i believe that the end product that the user gets must be as perfect as i can provide. And the end-results always speaks for themselves But again, this is not the end of the world, and i believe that your case is not that problematic. It's just that I am obsessed and always aim for perfectionRegarding the 301 mapping, if you choose to move forward with it, you do not need to move all URLs at once. You should go ahead and test couple of URLs to see how Google reacts, how long does it takes until google index is updated etc. (you probably will want to submit a new updated sitemap to get things move faster). There is always some ranking loss in 301 redirections, especially in the first couple of day/weeks. But it can be fixed with further SEO efforts.
Best
Yossi
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
-
301 redirect to URL plus anchor tag???
Hi - my company has just had a site redesign completed, and our "old" site we have landing pages for a full product line. The new design has taken the content from those landing pages and placed them into one long scrolling page. We currently rank well on the "old" landing pages but now all that content is contained in a single page with anchor tags throughout attached to the headings. Can you set up 301's to anchor tags? Example: old site www.mysite.com/products/automotive/auto-parts.html new site: www.mysite.com/products/automotive#auto-parts
Algorithm Updates | | Jenny10 -
Mobile Brand Markup Question
Hi Moz Community, I was searching for "Gifts for men" in Google Search on my phone and saw a few results in the 3rd (Nordstrom), 4th (Etsy) and 5th(Grommet) place that had their brand name in the area under the title tag where the green url is usually listed on desktop. One example of the green text under the title tag is Nordstrom which lookes like this: Nordstrom > Shop > Gifts Whereas the first result from UncommonGoods looks like this in the green text: www.uncommongoods.com > by recipient I'm trying to figure out what markup Nordstrom, Etsy, ect used on their site to get their brand name to show up not as a url but as a brandname Anyone know the answer to this? Thanks!
Algorithm Updates | | znotes0 -
Both video and article schema markup properties?
I am curious, if i can add both "video" and "article" schema.org markup for my video pages. Currently i have video markup up and running, but it only shows up in SERPs when users browse videos (not web content). Can i add "article" markup as well, so the markup will show on Web search? Thanks, Dime
Algorithm Updates | | dimicos0 -
Number of Items As a Google Ranking Factor??
If I search for "hiking boots" and scan down the SERPs I see the following... Google reports "483 items" for the Zappos.com page. Google reports "Results 1 - 36 of 85" for the Shoebuy.com page (and that does not appear in their code). So, Google is obviously paying attention to the depth of your information or the number of items that you are showing. If they think that is important enough to count and report in the SERPs, might they also be using that information as a ranking factor?? PRACTICAL APPLICATION FOR SEO: If google is using this information, perhaps people should list all of their color, size, etc variants on a single page. For example if you sell widgets in five colors, instead of making one page for each color, list all five on the same page.
Algorithm Updates | | EGOL1 -
Does a KML file have to be indexed by Google?
I'm currently using the Yoast Local SEO plugin for WordPress to generate my KML file which is linked to from the GeoSitemap. Check it out http://www.holycitycatering.com/sitemap_index.xml. A competitor of mine just told me that this isn't correct and that the link to the KML should be a downloadable file that's indexed in Google. This is the opposite of what Yoast is saying... "He's wrong. 🙂 And the KML isn't a file, it's being rendered. You wouldn't want it to be indexed anyway, you just want Google to find the information in there. What is the best way to create a KML? Should it be indexed?
Algorithm Updates | | projectassistant1 -
Shared Hosting - Bad for SEO? (exp. Godaddy)
There were a lot of questions and data on this a few years back and nothing terribly recent so i wanted to get the discussion going again and see if any new data has been published. Is hosting your website on a shared host like Godaddy or Network Solutions going to hurt your rankings because their holds a chance that you could be on the same IP as spammy websites? My gut feeling is no primarily because almost 90% of the worldwide web is on shared hosting but i do not have a lot of data to back it up. Id love to hear some feedback. Cheers - Kyle
Algorithm Updates | | kchandler0 -
Bing Vs Google SERP
I realize the major search engines use different criteria but I don't see how - for the same home page keyword - my site could rank #3 on page 1 for a Bing search and be off the charts (Page 15+)? on Google. Has Google gone so far off the charts with their new Penguins and Pandas so as to be in a different universe? Seems Google is now extremely over-weighting big sites like Wikipedia, WebMD, eHow, etc. and in doing so vastly reducing the diversity of results shown. I am commonly seeing different pages of the same website appear multiple times in the first 2-3 pages of Google results. What's the point?
Algorithm Updates | | veezer0 -
SEO updates and rank changes
We have been updating page titles and meta descriptions for a client (not changing ANY links and the content we are replacing is "fluff," no major keywords or any relevant information) yet in the past few weeks, rankings have plummeted. I used the SEOMoz grader to check and make sure we have the keywords in there, in the right places for the updated page source info, and we're getting A's yet for those same keywords, the website is nowhere to be found. For example for the phrase "organic t shirts," we get an A for this page: http://greenpromotionalitems.com/organic-t-shirts.htm but when searching organic t shirts, no Green Promotional Items... Ideas?
Algorithm Updates | | laidlawseo0