Should I keep, or disavow PA 1 DA 0 backlink?
-
Hi,
I am doing link cleaning, and still a bit new to this, and would appreciate the community's help
So, I have a site which has quite a lot of low DA (or no DA) follow backlinks. BUT,
- the links are from my niche
- the sites are not spammy
- the anchors are okay
- and they are from good Geo location for me
The only negative thing is that these sites are a bit "dead" meaning that there is no new content, and thus there is no traffic or clicks coming from them.
Should I keep those links or disavow them?
To me these links are natural, but do they help me at all....
FYI I have plenty of good DA links. But what do you guys think, if I disavow all these low DA backlinks, does Google think that I am trying to manipulate my backlink structure to look better than it naturally is?
Cheers guys and girls!
-
Thanks Gaston! Good to keep this in mind.
-
I don't think that Moz doesn't care about when the content was published.
Keep in mind that Moz and Ahref mostly weight and analyze their backlink profile, thus it's possible that they haven't discovered any backlinks and their metrics can be low.Hope it helps.
Best luck.
GR -
Thanks Gaston for your response!
It sure helps in decision making.I guess I'll just filter and disavow really spammy backlinks with viagra and other medicine anchor texts.
Yeah, I have also noticed big differences with different tools. Quite often for example Ahrefs gives 0 DR and 0 UR, and Moz gives 25 DA and 12 PA on the same domain / url. This has been the case quite often with some old blogs with no updates in couple years. Maybe Moz doesn't care when was the latest content added to the site. Or maybe Ahrefs gives much less value to sites which don't get new content, and puts the score down much more.
-
Hi Risto,
Google said it many times that they are pretty good at detecting bad links thus they encourage us to disavow links only when a manual penalty has hit your site or when you dont trust Google's algorithms and/or do know that those links are really hurting you.
That said, my personal opinion, don't bother at all.
Also, please keep in mind that private metrics as PA, DA, TF, CF or whatever do not reflect what google sees. Those companies with their algorithms try to simulate what Google understands so don't fully rely on them.Hope this helps.
Best luck.
GR
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
-
Backlink audit - anyone know of a good tool for manually checking backlinks?
Hi all, I'm looking at how to handle backlinks on a site, and am seeking a tool into which I can manually paste backlinks - is there a good backlink audit tool that offers this functionality? Please let me know! Thanks in advance, Luke
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | McTaggart0 -
Disavowing 100k Affiliate Links
Hi all, hope you're all good. I am updating our disavow file, we've noticed a couple more spammy links which are pointing at or site. While I was at it, affiliate links came to my mind. At the moment we have over 100k+ affiliate links pointing to the root of our site and other categories/products, most of them are do-follow. However, taking a look at WMT, it's one of our 'Who links the most' and the affiliate network is pointing a total of 115,065 links to us. My question; bearing it mind this site generates over 2million hits a month, is it really worth disavowing the entire affiliate link network. This would result is all of those 100,000 links being disavowed over time. Do you think this would result in a positive? Let me know your thoughts.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Brett-S0 -
Is 1:1 301 redirect required on indexed URL when restructing URL even if the new URL is canonicalized?
Hello folks, We are restructuring some URLS which forms a fair chunk of the content of the domain.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | HB17
These content are auto generated rather than manually created unlike other parts of the website. The same content is currently accessible from two URLs: /used-books/autobiography-a-long-walk-to-freedom-isbn
/autobiography/used-books/a-long-walk-to-freedom-isbn The URL 1 uses the URL 2 as the canonical url and it has worked allright since Moz does
not show the two as duplicate of each other. Google has also indexed the canonical URL although
there is still a few 'URL 1s' which were indexed before the canonical was implemented. The updated URL structure will look like something like this: /used-books/autobiography-a-long-walk-to-freedom-author-name-isbn
/autobiography/used-books/a-long-walk-to-freedom-authore-name-isbn It would be great to have just a single URL but a few business requirement prevents
us from having just the canonical URL only even with the new structure. Since we will still have two URLs to access the same content and we were wondering
whether we will need to do a 1:1 301 redirect on the current URLs or since there will be canonical URL
(/autobiography/used-books/a-long-walk-to-freedom-authore-name-isbn),
we won't need to worry about doing the 1:1 redirect on the the indexed content? Please note that the content will still be accessible from the OLD URL (unless 301ed of course). If it is advisable to do a 1:1 301 redirect this is what we intend to do: /used-books/autobiography-a-long-walk-to-freedom-isbn 301 to
/used-books/autobiography-a-long-walk-to-freedom-author-name-isbn /autobiography/used-books/a-long-walk-to-freedom-isbn 301 to
/autobiography/used-books/a-long-walk-to-freedom-authore-name-isbn Any advice/suggestions would be greated appreciated. Thank you.0 -
Should I disavow a particular site (no warnings in WMT)?
I’m currently getting a lot of external links to my website from ‘xyz’. This a series of sites with near identical content and duplicate URLs (xyz234.com, xyz63.com, xyz456.com etc). There are 15 of these sites which are contributing 6236 external links. Would you agree that these URLs are candidates to be disavowed? I currently have no unnatural link warnings in GWT but I’m concerned with watching out for negative SEO and keeping our link profile healthy. Would pruning spammy links like these be a good step? Any help would be appreciated! 🙂
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | RG_SEO0 -
How to remove non-requested, non-desired backlinks
Dear Mosers, Before Penguin update we start a link back profile study about who and why are linking and we found hundred of garbage sites like these: http://rakeback-blogger.com/links/ http://personalinjuryattorney-fl.org/get-a-fl-personal-injury-attorney-instead-of-crying-over-spilt-milk and hundred more... They don't have contact form or email address, so what is the best way to remove our link from there (there are any quick way), these sites are damaging our rank. Thank you for your help Claudio
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | SharewarePros0 -
Please let me know how to improve this email backlink request
Hello, How can I improve upon this email request: Your "Links" section contains a lot of good websites, and we would like our site to be added to the list. Our pagerank 4 website, which carries (Here I said what we carry) You have similar sites located in the "Other" Section on your link page. We would greatly appreciate being added to this list. Sincerely, BobW
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | BobGW
Webmaster
Our Site Name Here
Email Address Here
Phone Number Here0 -
Forwarding Empty URLs to Homepage for SEO & Old Backlink Salvaging - Is there any value or risk?
Our company owns about 30 URLs that we aren't currently using. Is there any SEO value to be gained by forwarding these content-less URLs to our homepage if they aren't currently indexed by google? Some of these sites were previously in use at low traffic volumes by companies who licensed use of our brand and URL. After parting ways a year or longer in the past, no 301 redirection was done to save the link juice, so it's long gone at this point. However, there may be some sites on the net that are still linking to various pages on the URL. What would be the best course of action to salvage any value of these URLs until they are in use again as full websites? Insights would be greatly appreciated! Cheers, Justin
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | grayline0 -
What passes more value, a contextual link or a 1-to-1 301 redirect?
I have a client who is running a website which just lost a significant amount of rankings and by extension organic traffic in a redesign. Call it newsite.com. The client also has an older site that will no longer be updated, but has good authority that's built up over time. It even out ranks the current site for some queries. This website has no real value to my client. We want to try to pass the authority from oldsite.com to newsite.com as efficiently as possible. Each site has pages a good amount of matching pages, ie. oldsite.com/subject1 and newsite.com/subject1 My question is, would it provide more value to put a contextual link on the old page or simply redirect the entire page to the new site? oldsite.com/subject1 contains a link to newsite.com/subject1 oldsite.com/subject1 301 redirects to newsite.com/subject1 My guess is that the 301 would pass more value, but would like a SEOMoz opinion as well! Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Alder1