Do you still loose 15% of value of inbound links when you redirect your site from http to https (so all inbound links to http are being redirected to https version)?
-
I know when you redesign your on website, you loose about 15% internally due to the 301 redirects (see moz article: https://moz.com/blog/accidental-seo-tests-how-301-redirects-are-likely-impacting-your-brand), but I'm wondering if that also applies to value of inbound links when you redirect your http://www.sitename.com to https://www.sitename.com.
I appreciate your help!
-
Exactly what Thomas said.
-
If it's easy for you to get them to change them, then yes I would, however I wouldn't spend more than a quick email on getting it done.
-
Thanks, Logan. So do you think there is any value in having the top inbound links (highest domain authority) change their links to the https version of the site?
-
There is no value or authority lost with the redirects from non-secure to secure. Google gives slightly more weight to sites that go secure, so the trade off is they don't ding those types of redirects anymore.
Gary Illyes also recently stated that any type of 3xx redirect no longer loses PageRank - take that with a grain of salt though, I only provided this bit of info to put you at ease about redirects for HTTP > HTTPS.
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
-
Http to https for large ecommerce - our steps taken (any others recommended?)
**Here is the message from our technical team for the http to https migration; are there any other http to https migration steps recommended? ** Http to https migration steps (for this large ecommerce site): We implemented HTTPS (HTTP over TLS) protocol today (5/4/2017). Applied a patch to ensure that HTTPS pages did not have NoIndex, NoFollow and tested before and after . Added new IIS HTTPS Redirect to enforce HTTPS from HTTP and changed others, including the WWW redirect Changed HTTPS only for Cookies as required as per new PCI vulnerabilities Changed the Basepage HTML template to use Relative Paths or Absolute URLs with HTTPS only (to prevent mixed content) Created and ran a SQL Script to cleanup 16 tables from HTTP to HTTPS (about 20,000 of them, including internal URL links, site settings, etc) Ran Google Sitemap Generator to create new sitemaps with HTTPS Added new HTTPS instance of the site into Webmaster Tools, then added verification code to master page, verified and then submitted the sitemaps to Search Console (QUESTION: will historical data in Google Console/ WMT be preserved for https?) **Follow up steps for http to https migration for large ecommerce: ** From this point forward, to avoid “mixed content”, the Marketing team must use either Relative Paths or Absolute Paths with HTTPS only in any customization (i.e. Basepage) or any new link, such as created in Content Management (i.e. Long Description). Any mixed content will make the website look not secure to customers and search engine spiders – so it is very important to be disciplined and diligent about this. Contact Salesforce to change the protocol to HTTPS only. Meanwhile, to prevent mixed content, we put in a temporary custom javascript change as workaround – but this should not be permanent especially as to the next upgrade will remove it – so we need Saleforce to make a change ASAP. We did not change Blog site (on sub domain), but we should even though it is only a Content site because it will not be signaled as Secure. This means we need to have someone make the changes to WordPress to enforce HTTPS and then change any links. In terms of impact to page ranking due to Google’s treatment of HTTPS over HTTP and due to some impact to page speed – we will need to monitor closely to see how indexing, organic traffic and page ranking goes and take any additional actions as necessary.
Technical SEO | | seo20170 -
Proper 301 redirect code for http to https
I see lots of suggestions on the web for forwarding http to https. I've got several existing sites that want to take advantage of the SSL boost for SEO (however slight) and I don't want to lose SEO placements in the process. I can force all pages to be viewed through the SSL - that's no problem. But for SEO reasons, do I need to do a 301 redirect line of code for every page in the site to the new "https" version? Or is there a way to catch all with one line of code that Google, etc. will recognize & honor?
Technical SEO | | wcksmith10 -
Rel=canonical - Identical .com and .us Version of Site
We have a .us and a .com version of our site that we direct customers to based on location to servers. This is not changing for the foreseeable future. We had restricted Google from crawling the .us version of the site and all was fine until I started to see the https version of the .us appearing in the SERPs for certain keywords we keep an eye on. The .com still exists and is sometimes directly above or under the .us. It is occasionally a different page on the site with similar content to the query, or sometimes it just returns the exact same page for both the .com and the .us results. This has me worried about duplicate content issues. The question(s): Should I just get the https version of the .us to not be crawled/indexed and leave it at that or should I work to get a rel=canonical set up for the entire .us to .com (making the .com the canonical version)? Are there any major pitfalls I should be aware of in regards to the rel=canonical across the entire domain (both the .us and .com are identical and these newly crawled/indexed .us pages rank pretty nicely sometimes)? Am I better off just correcting it so the .us is no longer crawled and indexed and leaving it at that? Side question: Have any ecommerce guys noticed that Googlebot has started to crawl/index and serve up https version of your URLs in the SERPs even if the only way to get into those versions of the pages are to either append the https:// yourself to the URL or to go through a sign in or check out page? Is Google, in the wake of their https everywhere and potentially making it a ranking signal, forcing the check for the https of any given URL and choosing to index that? I just can't figure out how it is even finding those URLs to index if it isn't seeing http://www.example.com and then adding the https:// itself and checking... Help/insight on either point would be appreciated.
Technical SEO | | TLM0 -
Redirecting http to https, do I need to add new url to webaster tools?
Hey all, we just 301 redirected all our http url's to https. I'm getting some funky data in webmaster tools, such as a drastic change in pages indexed and pages submitted over pages indexed. Might be a dumb question, but do I need to update my website in webmaster tools with the new https address, or should I be getting credible data from the old http url that is already in there? Thank you in advance!
Technical SEO | | jaychow0 -
Paid directory links--good or bad thing to do for Prof. Services sites?
Yes, I am pretty darn new to SEO and have heard that Google doesn't like Paid directory links. I have looked at some of my competition and they must have paid to get in certain directories as I don't see any backlinks posted on their home pages (usually a badge or icon must be placed on the homepage to avoid a fee.)
Technical SEO | | Stratocaster0 -
Is it something really obvious or is off-site link building all thats missing?
I'm trying to get a client ranked for the keyword Quaich and its like pulling teeth 😞 This keyword performs brilliantly for adwords but I've never got it ranked at all in googles SERPs. Last November I created this page: http://kiltmakers.co.uk/quaich Which ranks as A with seo-moz but still nothing. I'm still a newbie to SEO work but can someone point me in the right direction? Is it just the domain authority that the issue - should I switch my focus to link building off-site?
Technical SEO | | sunscreem0 -
Redirect
How do I redirect this url: http://www.example.com/img/head/beauty-spa.jpg" width="114" height="50" alt="image"/></a> </div> <div class="c0 r"><a href="/m/imgres?q=short+holiday+treatments Thank you for your help.
Technical SEO | | petrakraft0 -
Converse.com - flash and html version of site... bad idea?
I have a questions regarding Converse.com. I realize this ecommerce site is needs a lot of seo help. There’s plenty of obvious low hanging seo fruit. On a high level, I see a very large SEO issue with the site architecture. The site is a full page flash experience that uses a # in the URL. The search engines pretty much see every flash page as the home page. To help with issue a HTML version of the site was created. Google crawls the Home Page - Converse.com http://www.converse.com Marimekko category page (flash version) http://www.converse.com/#/products/featured/marimekko Marimekko category page (html version, need to have flash disabled) http://www.converse.com/products/featured/marimekko Here is the example of the issue. This site has a great post featuring Helen Marimekko shoes http://www.coolmompicks.com/2011/03/finnish_foot_prints.php The post links to the flash Marimekko catagory page (http://www.converse.com/#/products/featured/marimekko) as I would expect (ninety something percent of visitors to converse.com have the required flash plug in). So the flash page is getting the link back juice. But the flash page is invisible to google. When I search for “converse marimekko” in google, the marimekko landing page is not in the top 500 results. So I then searched for “converse.com marimekko” and see the HTML version of the landing page listed as the 4<sup>th</sup> organic result. The result has the html version of the page. When I click the link I get redirected to the flash Marimekko category page but if I do not have flash I go to the html category page. ----- Marimekko - Converse All Star Marimekko Price: $85, Jack Purcell Helen Marimekko Price: $75 ... www.converse.com/products/featured/marimekko - Cached So my issues are… Is converse skating on thin SEO ice by having a HTML and flash version of their site/product pages? Do you think it’s a huge drag on seo rankings to have a large % of back links linking to flash pages when google is crawling the html pages? Any recommendations on to what to do about this? Thanks, SEOsurfer
Technical SEO | | seosurfer-2883190