Link juice and max number of links clarification
-
I understand roughly that "Link Juice" is passed by dividing PR by the number of links on a page. I also understand the juice available is reduced by some portion on each iteration.
- 50 PR page
- 10 links on page
- 5 * .9 = 4.5 PR goes to each link.
Correct?
If so and knowing Google stops counting links somewhere around 100, how would it impact the flow to have over 100 links?
IE
- 50 PR page
- 150 links on the page
- .33 *.9 = .29PR to each link BUT only for 100 of them.
After that, the juice is just lost?
Also, I assume Google, to the best of its ability, organizes the links in order of importance such that content links are counted before footer links etc.
-
As always in the SEO industry, there's no right answer for any particular case but I think you got a really structured approach to it. It would be great to know the results of your experiment. This could be a really good article in the seomoz community, let me know how it goes!
-
Agreed, the extreme repetition of the brand keywords and anchor text was one of my first arguments for dropping the section.
Think, from everything I've read so far, there appears to be an additional juice loss at one point but it would highly dependent on the trust of the page and the nature of the links. Certainly not a strong enough correlation to make part of my case however.
-
I think that the link #102 may have the same value of link #35, I don't think that adding many links diminishes the value of each one. What I assume however is that:
- having many links in one page diminishes the control you have on them, so google may crawl some of them and give different weight on each one. That0s why I'll better put fewer links
- you're right about having more links to your pages augment the possibility of have thoes pages in a better position against other. However as I said before, beware that google may not crawl all your links all the time. You can achieve the same proiportion of importance with less links (ex. 10 links vs 2 is the same of 100 vs 20: same weight more control and less internal spam risks.
- be wise when you build your links and try to not use too many anchor rich links. Even if you're onsite you don't want to let google think you're trying to overoptimize your page or its backlink profile. Create variations of your anchors and use them all.
-
The question come from a circumstance where 100's of links are contained in a supplemental tab on a product detail page. They link to applications of the product - each being a full product page. On some pages, there are only 40 links, other can be upwards of 1000 as the product is used as a replacement part for many other products.
I am championing the removal of the links, if not the whole tab. On a few pages, it would be useful to humans but clearly not on pages with 100s.
But if Google followed them all, then conceivably it would build a stronger "organic" structure to the catalogue as important products would get 1000's of links - others only a few.
Whatever value this might have, it would be negated if juice leaked faster after 100+ links.
From Matt's article above, "Google might choose not to follow or to index all those links." He also mentions them being a spam signal so I think it still wise to keep them low even if the 100kb limit has been lifted. Clearly there are still ramifications - a concept reinforced by this site's reports and comments.
To my question...from what both of you have said, it doesn't appear there is strong evidence a very high number of links directly causes additional penalty as far as link juice is concerned.
For the record, I'm not calculating PR or stuck on exact counts - my focus always starts with the end user. But, I'd hate to have a structural item that causes undue damage.
-
The context is a parts page where potential hundreds of link could be associate with other parts the item fit. I looking to firm up my argument against the concept so I want to understand better the true impact of the section.
If it was accelerating the decay of link juice, all the more reason. If not, they may actual help certain products appear organically stronger (i.e. a part that fits on a greater number of products will have more incoming links).
Navigation is actually quite tight (under 20 links) by modern standards.
-
As eyepaq said a 100 links limit is not the case anymore, however even if google is able to give value to them all it really makes sense to ahve so many links in your page? Are you using fat footers? Don't rely on that structure to give value to your internal pages, if you find 100 links in one page to be needed for users to navigate through your site try to restructure it a little and create different categories.
I don't know how much value is lost after 100 links but you should try to have tinier and themed list of links adding a further step in your navigation.google won't give hesmae value to those pages as users' won't either.
-
Hi,
You should count those at all. If you get stuck in counting and calculating PR and how much PR is passed from one page to another you will lose focus from what it dose matter. This dosen't.
About the 100 links per page - that was a very old technical limitation from Google's side. There is no longer the case.
See more here: http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/how-many-links-per-page/
and a fast 2 and so min video from Matt Cutts here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l6g5hoBYlf0
So the bottom line is that you should not count and focus on PR and how much PR is passed -only look at things from a normal user and ask your self: dose t his page make sense ? Dose it make sense to have over 100 links on this page ?
Not sure if this was the answer you are looking for but ... hope it helps.
Cheers.
-
I used 'PR' mainly because 'juice points' sounded stupid.
I'm more interested in what happens past the ~100 links.
Does the remaining juice get reallocated or does the page leak at a higher rate?
-
Hi Spry, as you already mentioned, not all links has the same weight, there are navigationla links like in the footer, in the menu; also google may give some different weight among them, moreover some value may be reduced, and also there are some other factors that google uses to weight each link in a page that we don't know, but we may assume they have.
So given that we can calculate an aproximate value of juice passed from a link to another I won't rely so much in PR, the time you're spending in this caluclations may be given to other tasks. In general you may assume that the best pages to obtain links are pages which are nearest to the homepage of a site and which has the least number of outgoing (both internal and external) links.
Don't rely so much on PR, I've seen so many low page rank pages ranking well and high pr pages with no rankings that I think that you need to consider other parameters which are more important when it comes to linkbuilding: age of the domain, authority, topic related, etc etc.
If your calculations are made for onsite optimization just try to have your main pages higher in your site structure and linked directly from the homepage or from m ain categories.
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
-
Unnatural Links on Forum Posts
Google responds to my reconsideration request. They give me like 2 links of the many unnatural links which are actually people mentioning our website in their conversation. How can that be unnatural, legitimate people discussing about our website services? Even if it's unnatural, how can I possibly remove a backlink from a forum post?
Technical SEO | | Droidman860 -
Outbound Links
I have a page on upstrap-pro.com that provides weights of cameras and lenses. The user/buyer of my on-slip camera straps needs to know the weight his camera and lens to determine the proper pad size... large to small. We have put together a long list of the most popular customer cameras. The way it was done (by my daughter) was to also provide a via a link to dpreview.com which is an excellent site for camera information including specifications etc. My personal feeling about this is mixed. I can do it by having it open dpreview.com in a new tab but then the user/customer could still get distracted and go down the rabbit hole. On the other hand dpreview is such a good site that if they are new to photography and don't know about it, they should. I don't get a dime from dpreview. If fact I doubt they would ever link back to me because they do not write about camera straps. I hear mixed things about outbound links. In this file there are quite a few outbound links to dpreview to keep it consistent. I could do a nofollow on all of them but I read that this is the easy way out. Google is jump ball and I have no clue what Cutts and his merry men are going to decide is cool or not cool. I'd like some thoughts or options... Thanks... A small part of the file below. Canon EF 14mm f/2.8L II USM Wideangle prime lens Canon EF 22.8 oz 645 g Canon EF 14mm f/2.8L USM
Technical SEO | | Asteg0 -
Penalised due to links?
Hi, Is there a way to tell if a site has been penalised for it's links? Our site dropped last Friday, and we would like to rule out links, as we plan to move the site to our main site and re-direct the links, unless Google would punish the new url due to this. Our old site does not show any warnings for the link, and neither does our Google WM account, the only thing we have to go by is a big drop in SERP. Many thanks. Quime.
Technical SEO | | Quime0 -
Should I wory about spam domains linking to me?
A while ago my site had a pharmacy hack done to it and created a ton of spam links. I've since fixed the issues on my site but I'm still showing links from their sites. See screen shot: http://awesomescreenshot.com/0497cc147 I think they are links from the spam site to me and not my site "yakanger" linking to them correct? Do I need to worry about these? Can I get rid of them?
Technical SEO | | mr_w2 -
If people link to you incorrectly, does it hurt you?
In Google WM tools I'm seeing so many 404 crawl errors but they're all from other sites linking to us incorrectly, which I can't do anything about. Will this hurt us somehow as far as SEO goes? The logical thing would be that it would hurt the site doiing the linking but it does come up in OUR WM tools, so it makes me wonder.
Technical SEO | | UnderRugSwept0 -
Number of links in new nav bar
Hi We've just had a spanky new design implemented on Hypnosis Downloads.com My concern is over the top nav. While it's nice for users to get those handy dropdowns, it adds a lot of links to every page, and spreads link weight out equally over all sorts of pages. The place I really want the link weight is under the Downloads link - in those categories and so I am thinking about removing dropdowns for everything but this category. Does that sound like a sensible move to you? Is it likely to actually make a difference? Cheers Roger
Technical SEO | | RogerElliott0 -
Internal linking to subdomains
Hi *, I have a main site called example.org, and a lot of user generated pages to foo.example.org / bar.example.org and so on. Most of those pages link back to example.org. In example.org I have a page that links to all subdomains. How can I optimize the pagerank of the list page? Should I add nofollow to subdomain sites to avoid passing link juice to those sites and keep normal linking from subdomain sites?
Technical SEO | | ngw0 -
Video Sitemaps - Clarification Needed
I'm trying to make sense of video sitemaps so I can get one up and going but the set up seems unclear. We currently have 7 videos created and up on Youtube. I've got them embedded on the site to a "Video" landing page as well as having these product demo videos embedded on appropriate product detail pages. So when setting up the video sitemap it looks like I'll be using the video:player_loctag as opposed to video:content_locbecause I'm not linking to the file itself but rather a page it's hosted on. Correct? Additionally I'm adding the product detail page url here, not Youtube right? Lastly, do I need to insert an autoplay piece on the videos on the product detail page? I feel that would be an annoying user experience.</video:content_loc></video:player_loc> So part of my sitemap might look like this... <video:player_loc allow_embed="yes" autoplay="ap=[?]">http://website/ProductDetailURL</video:player_loc>
Technical SEO | | dgmiles0