URL in SERP: Google's stand
-
Months back, we can notice "keyword" will be bold and highlighted if its in the SERP URL. Now Google no more highlights any URLs even with exact match of keyword we search. Beside UI, Does this mean Google might devalued or reduced the importance of URL as ranking factor? We can see many search results match partially or completely in URL with search keywords.
-
Google is more interesting in the information you present users with and whether or not you can answer their query. Highlighting keywords may, to those not in the know, show that a website is more likely to answer a query, but in reality it may not be the case.
It's falls under the same method of Google attributing actual meaning, for example "wood floor" could be perceived as "wooden floor" or "wood flooring" and so on, where those websites might help the user more so than the one which contains the exact keyword in the URL.
-
Hi
Google no more highlights even title but it is a ranking factor, highlights only words in description but that is not a direct ranking factor. So If keyword in url is not highlighting that doesn't mean Google devalued importance of URL yes but Google said on 9th of March 2017 that keywords in URLs are overrated for Google SEO.recently
URLs are a minor ranking factor search engines use when determining a particular page or resource's relevance to a search query.
I personally use keywords in URL.
Thanks
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
-
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
Algorithm Updates | | jessekanman
Breadcrumb: www.mysite.com > category1 > subcat2 > subcat3 Product URL: http://www.mysite.com/product/product-name/_/R-133456E112
Breadcrumb: www.mysite.com > category1 > subcat2 > subcat3 > product name The "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! Jesse0 -
Looking to condense SERP reults
For several of our keywords we have two listings on page 1 of the SERP's, both pages on the same domain. It's the "top"
Algorithm Updates | | absoauto
level category and than sub category within that top level category. Ideally, we could condense and have just the one result, at a higher position in the SERP. I thought Google would eventually do this for us as I've seen in the past, but it's been a few years now and still hasn't happened. Any suggestions?0 -
Organic SERP CTRs and Universal Search
We have a keyword that we show up in the #1 position for organically. However that number one position is a Maps blended search result and we are the first listing with link, address and phone number. This is a high volume keyword but we receive little traffic from it. Looking in Web Master Tools this is corroborated in showing that for this keyword our average position is 1.7, high volume of impressions but click through rate is 0.04%! Is it possible that people scroll past the first result when it is a Maps blended search result to go to the first "true" organic listing? Has anyone else seen this? Is there anything a website owner can do in this situation to increase CTR for your listing?
Algorithm Updates | | IrvCo_Interactive0 -
Interesting SERP trend I'm observing
I know Google has been favoring brands a big names lately, but I'm seeing something a bit more alarming Our company offers custom embroidered patches, and through keyword and search research I have discovered that almost all searches for "embroidered patches" are by people who need embroidered patches and are looking to purchase them, or learn more about the process of purchasing them. The SERPs for this term used to be all embroidered patch companies such as ours. In the past month: We've been outranked by a page on Amazon that's fairly irrelevant. An equally irrelevant ebay page has emerged The Wikipedia page for "embroidered patch" is now number seven. This has pushed three other embroidered patch companies off the first page (not that I'm complaining because it wasn't our company . . . yet). My question is, has anyone else noticed something similar happening, where large sites are gaining ground, in spite of the fact that they have low relevance to the search term?
Algorithm Updates | | UnderRugSwept0 -
Is it normal to receive 2 mails from Google?
I filed a reconsideration request that was answered in less than a week. Subsequently I was told that no manual penalty was in place but various algorithm factors might be causing my heavy drops in ranking. Then I got a second email which was even more specific. This was great, really heartening stuff and a total surprise as it was very helpful. Is it normal to receive 2 emails from Google with such clear information? I have been very pleased by the comments they have made as it has shown me that they're more customer focused than I had been led to believe by all the research I had done pre reconsideration request. Has anyone else had a clear outline of what they needed to fix and has their site subsequently rebounded post fixing?
Algorithm Updates | | swimwithfishes0 -
Google spitting out old data as new alerts
Am I just unlucky or are others seeing this too? I have several google alerts. For the past 6 months, google keeps sending crap along with good stuff. its a bit like their search results. There are three types of Alerts they send that I'm not impressed with. 1. Alerts that are from unintelligible splogs that take real news stories and rewrite them with unintelligible garbage that makes no sense at all. Sometimes, they serve up new alerts from the same splogs I saw several months ago, that I felt sure they would have zapped by now. 2. Old stories, that have been around for months. I just received one that was from January, from TechDirt, a big site that must get a huge amount of attention from google. 3. Irrelevant stories because they love to show how smart they are by splitting my alert keyword text into multiple words, but it gives useless results. This is the kind of stuff that crappy search engines like AltaVista used to do. Is google reverting to the childhood of search with all these changes?
Algorithm Updates | | loopyal0 -
Decrease in Organic Traffic Due to Google Places
Hello there, we are national junk removal company and have franchises in most major cities in the US. We wanted to check to see if anyone else has seen a drop in organic traffic with the changes that Google has done with the amalgamation of Google Places with the organic rankings. All our places pages are ranking quite well and we are ranking higher organically but it appears that people go to the Google Places page and then either leaving or picking up the phone and calling our 1800 number to book a job instead of going to our website to make the booking. The interesting thing is that although Google started these changes back in October 2010 we have seen the drop in organic traffic mostly starting in April, even though we have seen a steady increase in organic ranking across the board. Has any other franchise based company seen this happen as well? Your feedback is greatly appreciated!
Algorithm Updates | | imspecialistgotjunk0 -
Does Google index Wordpress pages with frames
Does Google or other search engines index Wordpress pages that use frames? Here is the site in question: http://www.source-nutrition.com/son/
Algorithm Updates | | BradBorst0