I am sorry for the delayed response and I will try to address all the above issues.

Wix SEO is based on Google Ajax Crawling solution for dynamic ajax pages. You can read the Google documentation here, https://developers.google.com/webmasters/ajax-crawling/docs/getting-started In short, Wix instructs search engines to read the content in a special version of the page which contains all the content in the source code of the page, unlike the original dynamic page. This is an acceptable solution in the industry and as you can see, Google indexes all pages content. Ajax crawling solution works nowadays for both Flash and Html sites.

SEOMOZ Issues. Although Ajax Crawling is fully supported by search engines, it is not fully supported by many third parties tools. We will check if we can work it out with SEOMOZ great tool.

Canonical urls - Since Search engines are extracting all data from the escaped fragment pages, the canonical tags in the escaped fragment are what's matters and not the ones in the viewer version (the version user's sees). Viewer version always shows root canonical (in fact it displays the same code for all pages). RayMa, please take a look at the escaped fragment versions of your pages and let me know if the canonical tags are set properly

Cloaking (Sorina) - As mentioned above, Wix is following all Ajax Crawling guidelines, whenever Google bot sees a page with Ajax Crawling meta tag, , or a url with hashbang, #!, then the bot goes directly to the seo version of the page.

404 links on Google Analytics (David) - Can you provide us some links so we can check it?

Please let me know if I have missed anything.

Hi Guys, My name is Eitan and I am the SEO manager for WIX.com. I would like to try and clarify some issues raised here, so you will get a full picture regarding the SEO level for sites generated by Wix. Previously, sites were generated with Wix were based on Flash in the client side and seo was an issue for Wix to deal with and find a solution. In order to overcome the seo challenges, Wix came up with the solution of auto-generating HTML versions for each Flash site and serving the Html version to the search engines bots on the server side. So, the end results in terms of seo for Wix's Flash sites were very good. We can proudly say, that the seo level for those sites were well above the average seo level of most internet sites around the web. After explaining about Wix Flash sites seo, I would like to present much bigger news.... Since March 2012, we launched our new HTML5 editor which enables users to build themselves a free Html5 website. I encourage you to visit our sites and check hundreds of new and amazing Html5 templates. Our Html5 sites, are seo friendly and present top level of seo by using AJAX crawling, schema and microdata, adjusting your page titles and description, optimizing you images and more. Our users should know that by using the seo widget inside the editors, they are able to optimize their sites even more. I would like to conclude by saying that Wix sites (both Flash & Html5) have a decent level of SEO, and to ensure our users that they enjoy a well above market level of seo. I will be happy to answers any questions you may have in the future as well. Regards, Eitan Helman Seo Team Manager - Wix.com

Espresseo,

There is no option to change canonicals manually. The reason we have the canonical tag, at the moment, is to double verify that different variations of url, if exists, will all have canonical to the same page. For each one of your pages you can see the version Google sees and check if the canonical was set properly. To see mydomain.com go to mydomain.com/?escaped_fragement and to see mydomain.com/#!page/id go to mydomain.com/?escaped_fragment=page/id

Why do you want to change canonicals? If there is a real need then we may consider a solution for this. We always keep in mind that wrong usage of canonicals can harm users.

I think that seeing your pages indexed correctly on Google is a good sign that everything is working as expected. We follow all Ajax Crawling instructions as well as all cloaking rules and there are millions of Wix pages indexed on Google for a long time without any quality issues. There is no way to manipulate the seo versions of the pages, it serves automatically the same content the users sees.

The same content will get the exact same ranking regardless of the CMS that produced it.

John Mueller said websites are websites for Google on the post that @Casey mentioned.

For most sites out there, the available SEO settings on Wix are enough and switching a CMS will not boost their rankings. There are, for sure, sites that require a different CMS than Wix but SEO is rarely the reason for it.

Hi Rob,

Thanks for pointing out a problem. We forward your request to the relevant teams at Wix and they will try to take care of it as soon as possible.

Best.

@RayMa

Canonical: Search engines do not read the source code, they read the seo version of the pages. For the page http://about.wix.com/affiliate#!faq/cq3g Google will extract the data from the seo page http://about.wix.com/affiliate?escaped_fragment=faq/cq3g and here you see the correct canonical.

301 redirects: Very good point! We should solve it. Viewer will usually get the homepage for any invalid path, e.g. mydomain.com/invalidpath#!invalidhash will display the homepage. Google may get 404 on the seo version.

404: As said, users can rarely see 404 page as invalid urls are displaying the homepage.

Bing: Bing follows the Ajax Crawling and index internal pages, e.g. search _"​How much commission do Wix affiliates earn?" _and you will see the faq page from the first example. Please contact us with the site details so we can check your case.

RayMa,

Thank you for your great feedback.

Mapping old urls to new urls is definitely  a must have. We will do our best to deliver it.

Canonical - It looks like canonical control will make sense for your needs. We will check it.

Having said that, I don't think canonicals are a showstopper. If you think that each locality needs its own version, then search engines may understand it as well. An answer by Google for a similar issue (a bit old)  "@felipus I would not recommend using rel=canonical or 301 redirects if you are creating content for different geographic areas as this would most likely make geotargeting more difficult. " full post