Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Google ranking factors are increasingly more complex and less universal. Google is emphasizing different ranking factors for different scenarios.

What tools are available that can help identify which ranking factors Google may be weighting for a given query or industry?

For example, are there any tools that provide correlative analysis of Google's rankings for a given keyword?

Agreed, I also see their point to some extent. I think Google's ranking factors are much more dynamic than they used to be. Google's rankings are also becoming for more intuitive and less metrics-driven (eg keyword density). SEO studies are increasingly having trouble explaining Google's algorithm. For example, we all know that social shares and engagement metrics correlate strongly with Google rankings, but nobody is quite sure what the mechanism for that is.

"Likewise, if you're a local plumber and the top results have 1 or 2 referring domains but great content, ranking is going to take more focus on quality onsite than the car hire example."

Or, maybe they are ranking in spite of not having links, and if you get great content + 5 links you'll be #1...hard to say!

"what it takes to rank in each one will require different strengths and weaknesses"

Agreed, because Google is getting close to actually measuring what the searcher wants. i.e. Google has some way of knowing (through user interaction data, maybe?) that a person searching for "hair styles 2016" wants a photo-heavy article, but a person searching for "barack obama policies" wants a long form text article. Yet, IMO, keyword in text and backlinks will be important factors in both cases.

I agree that Google's machine learning/AI means that Google is using a more dynamic set of factors to match searcher intent to content, but this claim feels like an overstatement:

Let’s be quite clear: Except for important technical standards, there are no longer any specifc factors
or benchmark values that are universally valid for all online marketers and SEOs. Instead, there
are different ranking factors for every single industry, or even every single search query. And these
now change continuously.

Keyword-relevant content, backlinks, etc. still seem to be ranking factors across pretty much all queries/industries. For example, I can't think of a single industry where it would be a good idea to try to rank for [keyword] without including [keyword] in the visible text of the page. Also, websites that rank without any backlinks are incredibly rare (unheard of for competitive terms).

Doubtless some factors change (eg Google may favor webpages with images for a query like "best hairstyle for men" but not for another query), but other factors still seem to apply to all queries (or at least 95%+).

Thoughts?

Correct, Bing powers AOL and Yahoo.

I don't think DuckDuckGo has a Sitemap submission feature. If you list your sitemap in the robots.txt file, though, maybe they will still crawl it.

Also Googlers a) have to fight pretty much only with algorithms and b) have to minimize collateral damage. That gives black hatters an advantage, and makes it impossible for Google to completely win. What annoys me is the fact that almost every single SEO company claims to be 100% white hat and Google-approved, while many are buying links, doing link networks, etc. I can't figure out if they are really that ignorant of the rules or if they are just lying.

Good info, thanks!

I think you over-estimate how smart Googlers are and how dumb shady SEOs are. I've seen blatant tricks that have been working for years. I don't use such tricks because they are very risky, but I don't think we should dismiss them as useless - I think it's worth understanding which work and which don't, especially if our competitors are using them. We have competitors who are using very shady SEO tactics and winning with them. Understanding what they are doing and what is working helps us determine which white hat tactics to deploy against them. That's why I'm asking for data on CTR manipulation.

Yeh, I think this is a good topic to be aware of, even if we wouldn't use it. That way we can respond correctly if our competitors use it, figure out white-hat ways to combat it, have a better understanding of Google's algorithms, etc. All else failing, it wouldn't be expensive to test them out.

I generally agree with you that Google is getting better at detecting tricks, but Google is far from perfect and there are a lot of tricks that still work. I'm looking for specific results/data specifically on the CTR manipulation services...

Have you done any tests with CTR manipulation services work?

This is not a tactic white hat SEOs would use, but it's still good for us to know whether it works, so we can respond correctly if our competitors use it, to figure out white hat ways to combat it, to answer client questions, to have a better understanding of Google's algorithms, etc.

I've seen a variety of services on the fringe of the SEO world that send a flow of (fake) traffic to your website via Google, to drive up your SERP CTR and site engagement. Seems gray hat, but I'm curious as to whether it actually works.

The latest data I've seen from trustworthy sources (example and example 2) seems mixed on whether CTR has a direct impact on search rankings. Google claims it doesn't. I think it's possible it directly impacts rankings, or its possible Google is using some other metric to reward high engagement pages and CTR correlates with that.

Any insight on whether CTR manipulation services actually work?

It depends on the blog. General good manners dictate that you use your name or company name, but some blogs don't mind if you use your keywords. Read the blog's comment policy and/or look at the other approved comments to see if it's OK to use your keywords.

If in doubt, use your name or company name. Many bloggers don't appreciate keyword comments - they look less authentic and more spammy.

John,

I would go with the second title tag you listed. It contains all your keywords in exact or phrase match, and is more professional looking.

I avoid using exact keywords when it means your title becomes a list of keywords. It looks unprofessional and I haven't seen better results by doing it. I would ensure that your most important keyword is listed first.

Another example:

Keywords: cordless phones, buy phones, discount phones

My Title Tag: Buy Discount Cordless Phones (much better than a keyword list, and works just as well in my experience.)

So, I was reading Percy Jackson & the Olympians: The Battle of the Labyrinth tonight, and found a description of a graffiti tag in the Labyrinth that says "MOZ RULZ". What do you think? Is one of the Mozzers a demigod who has explored and survived the Labyrinth?

(See attachment for book quote.)

F1WmT5r

I've never seen any evidence that .org links are inherently more valuable than .com or other links. (I've not seen any evidence that .edu links are inherently better, either.)

This post from and this video Matt Cutts seem to imply that the TLD is not a significant factor in ranking.

I think this whole idea that links from certain TLDs (eg .edu) started because people took a true statement (eg "most .edu websites are high authority websites with strong editorial control) and extrapolated that into ".edu links are inherently more authoritative". Mediocre SEO's then latched onto this idea, because they found they could easily get .edu links through blog comments and sell them for a premium by claiming they are more powerful. What you actually had is people building outright spam links and claiming they are great just because they are on an .edu domain.

I analyze .edu and.org links just like I would any other link - relevance, authority of domain, authority of page, editorial strength, etc.

I think you may find this helpful: https://developers.google.com/webmasters/smartphone-sites/details

SEO:

• Do a search on Google for the products/services your company offers. Show your managers how potential buyers are finding your competitors and buying from them instead.
• Explain why SEO traffic can be such a powerful way to drive sales - because you get to present your company at the exact moment a potential buyer is looking for exactly what you have to offer!

Social Media:

• Present how you could use social media to promote content that would help position your company as an industry-thought leader.
• Present statistics showing how many people are using social media.
• Show how other companies in your industry are using social media to stay in touch with prospects, promote product specials, etc.

I'll skip the whole buying links lecture and give you some practical advice.

If you are going to buy links, my advice is to not buy them from a broker - links bought via brokers and networks are easier for Google to track and penalize. Buy direct from the webmaster.

I did a super-quick review of your backlinks in OSE. What I saw was mainly press releases, with a few links from sites you own, and links from pages full of spam like http://www.alivincent.com/blog/post/2010/04/28/Work-Weeke280a6e280a6-when-the-reality-show-becomes-a-REALITY!.aspx

I also notice that your backlinks are overwhelmingly using your target keywords as anchor text, so you may be suffering for anchor text over-optimization.

My recommendation would be to focus more on higher quality, natural backlinks. Focus on SEO strategies that build your brand and focus on users. You might find http://www.seomoz.org/blog/why-big-brands-get-all-the-breaks helpful.

Hope this is helpful.

Anyone have insight into what specific factors penguin is targeting and how it works?

Matt Cutts seemed to infer that the site was targeting things such as spun content, keyword stuffing, etc. but most of the sites that have been hit that I've seen aren't doing any obvious content spamming like that.

For example:

• Is penguin looking primarily at onsite or backlink factors?
• Does Penguin just discount spammy backlinks, or does it apply an additional penalty to sites that have poor quality backlinks?
• Anyone noticing specific onsite or offsite factors that correlate with whether a site has been hit or not?

A few suggestions:

• Anything you can do to get the new domains indexed and a few links built to them well in advance of the redirect might be a good idea. I've never had it happen myself, but I've heard of a few cases of lost rankings when redirecting to a fresh domain.
• Once you do the redirects, try to get your most important links changed to the new domain. (Redirects to lose some link juice and/or decay over time.)
• Make sure you are redirecting each page on the old site to the most relevant page on the new site.
• I've never redirected every single URL on one domain to pages on two other domains. You might want to ask around to see if Google might frown upon that (I can imagine this is a tactic spammers might try to use to pass link juice to a bunch of domains). I'm sure someone else has done this and could advise.
• Any chance of keeping your current domain for one of the two sites?

I can think of a few options for the homepage:

• Don't redirect it. Create a splash page with a "which do you want" option and links to both domains.
• Redirect it to the domain that is most important to you.
• Redirect it to the domain that will be most relevant to the highest number of users.
• Redirect it to the domain that will be most relevant to the keywords the homepage currently ranks for.

Hope this helps!