Impact of nofollow links
-
Does anyone know what the impact of a nofollowed link is on the ranking value any given page has to distribute? For example, if I have 2 links on a page, both followed, I know those links each distribute nearly 50% of the total ranking value the current page has to offer. However, if one of those links is nofollowed, does that automatically mean the other link gets the ranking value cast off by the nofollowed link? In other words, the single followed link now distributes nearly 100% of the ranking value the page has to offer?
It seems to me I remember hearing this was not the case and that the ranking value a nofollowed link would have if it were followed just evaporates. This would mean the single followed link still only passes on around 50%...not 100%.
Is the effect different if the links are internal vs. external?
If any citations are available to justify knowledge here, that would be great. I know a lot of people have opinions about this subject, but I'm not sure anyone knows Google's position.
Thanks!
-
Marcus, Great! That confirms everything I was thinking. We certainly aren't wasting our time page rank sculpting. Rather, I just wanted a confirmation (and appropriate citation) before requesting some changes. Thanks! Ryan
-
Hey Ryan,
If you nofollow a link the pagerank is still split evenly amongst the links on the page and the page rank that would have flowed through this one link is lost.
Google's position is pretty clear on this and is has been clarified by Matt Cutts and in the Google Webmaster Guidelines which provide some examples of the correct usage of the nofollow tag.
Back in the day, you could control the flow of page rank throughout your site like this but that ship sailed a long, long time ago (and crashed against the rocks).
The nofollow tag should be used for a few legitimate reasons.
- Untrusted links like those from blog comments
- To prevent a crawler following a link where it can not gain access like a forum profile or login page
- And to prevent the selling of page rank via paid links
There are likely some other legitimate uses but this covers off the basics.
If you are looking to use this to in a way sculpt the page rank and create more powerful links on pages within your site, don't bother, it won't work and is not the recommended way to interlink documents within your own site. If you want specific pages to not be indexed then use the noindex, follow tag on them or block them in robots.txt.
A few references:
http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/pagerank-sculpting/
http://support.google.com/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=96569
http://searchengineland.com/friends-dont-let-friends-use-nofollow-77922
Hope it helps!
Marcus
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
-
We´re in trouble with our on site internal link optimization - please help
Dear Moz community, We have made a great mistake. Looking at keyword search volumes somehow Moz showed volumes for two keywords which only differentiate by an '**s (plural) as same. **Now we optimized our internal links (all links have the keyword) for the singular word. Now looking at other search volume estimations from competitors we see, that the plural has 5 times bigger volume. Our issue: If we change some of the category links now to another keyword, we will loose our ranking with the singular word. Correct? If we do not change any of our internal links, we will never rank in top 6 with the keyword. (currently singular is 6 and plural is 15) What would you reccomend?
On-Page Optimization | | advertisingcloud0 -
Internal Linking From Blog to Website
Hi all, I'm just seeking opinions on something an external company have told us about linking from our blog to our website... Our website is; www.XYZ.com and our blog is www.XYZ.com/blog I add content to the blog on an almost daily basis and generally link on average 3 times from the blog (internally) to a various relevant pages on our website. Today I was told that by doing this I am 'diluting' the link juice which I understand but don't agree with... All I am doing is a form of internal linking which as far as I am aware is a good on-page technique? Just curious to learn other people's view on this... Many thanks Andy
On-Page Optimization | | TomKing0 -
Related Items Links
Hi, If an item page has 'related items' links and 'you may also like' links - and both those are essentially the same links, doesn't it make sense to only have one set?
On-Page Optimization | | Freelancer130 -
Too many links on product pages
Hello, What do you do if there are too many links on product pages? With 18 products per page, there's 2 links per product for 120 links on many pages. There's 50 products in many categories, categories are at most 1 click from the home page. Should we use pagination or not? Thanks
On-Page Optimization | | BobGW0 -
Too many links??
Hi mozzers I have a question that I need some feedback on please, I run 2 websites both e commerce retail sites and both doing well with SEO however, Our strongest site and parent site so to speak links to our sister site. Here is the outline. Site1 parent site is hosted on a unique URL and on a VPS. I have 384 links coming into this site from the other sister site. from various pages Site 2 the sister site, has 68,864 links coming in from site 1 as we have a link in the footer on site 1 to the home page of site 2. So far we have had no adverse affects from the Google zoo releases, however I am concerned that this many links will soon get penalized. Thoughts from anyone please? I am considering removing the footer link, thus removing 68,000 + incoming links. Looking for any advice here please. thanks Ryan
On-Page Optimization | | RyanC10 -
WBF told me to get rid of my low contrast footer links...
I just finished watching WBF where Rand took a moment to identify some of the potentially harmful SEO practices that could be penalized in the upcoming algo update targeting over-optimization. (Great post BTW!) One of which was using low contrast, exact match footer links to inner pages. But I couldn't help but notice something similar being done on the SEOmoz site. In the attached image, I compare this to a site I've done using a similar practice. What are your thoughts on footer links found in this example and how should we, as SEOs, handle footer links in the future? footer-links.gif
On-Page Optimization | | AlexanderAvery0 -
Why DoFollow & NoFollow Attributes on Same Internal Text Links?
I want to know that, why SEOmoz have defined DoFollow & NoFollow attributes on same internal text links? Please, find out attachment to know more. Left bar have On-Page / Site Optimization link with dofollow attribute but, right section have nofollow. So, why should they have apply on DoFollow or NoFollow attribute on same text links? 6806571615_138b8765fd_b.jpg
On-Page Optimization | | CommercePundit0 -
Canonical URL's - Fixed but still negatively impacted
I recently noticed that our canonical url's were not set up correctly. The incorrect setup predates me but it could have been in place for close to a year, maybe a bit more. Each of the url's had a "sortby" parameter on all of them. I had our platform provider make the fix and now everything is as it should be. I do see issues caused by this in Google Webmaster, for instance in the HTML suggestions it's telling me that pages have duplicate title tags when in fact this is the same page but with a variety of url parameters at the end of the url. To me this just highlights that there is a problem and we are being negatively impacted by the previous implementation. My question is has anyone been in this situation? Is there any way to flush this out or push Google to relook at this? Or is this a sit and be patient situation. I'm also slightly curious if Google will at some point look and see that the canonical urls were changed and then throw up a red flag even though they are finally the way they should be. Any feedback is appreciated. Thanks,
On-Page Optimization | | dgmiles
Dave0