Yext vs Localeze vs UBL for Local SEO
-
Which of these services is the best? Does anyone have experience with all three?
-
We've used all of these. I must say....YEXT scares me sometimes....I'm not sure why...but kinda like how YP.com scares me. We are a partner with YEXT and Localeze....and I worry about dupes/overlaps between the two trying to figure out which content to use. Anyone else use the two together and have any concerns?
I think WhiteSpark is also a great tool....
Thanks for the insight! Great stuff.
-
Hello everyone at Moz! I wanted to add some new information that I found.
Yesterday I commented here that you should not use a service like Yext because it seems overpriced, for something you can do on your own. Some sites like foursquare.com do charge a fee. Other sites like local.com, make it very hard to add your business. Local.com continues to redirect me to Yext. I will say that Yext does provide you a good report showing what directories have your site listed. From there you can go on your own and work to add your site to all the directories.
I still think Yext is overpriced and it is better to do the service on your own. Hire one of your marketers to spend a few days working on this. At least this way you can be sure that all descriptions and information is unique.
-
I just found out that to get listed with CitySearch, you must go through this link. http://www.expressupdate.com
It is still free.
CitySearch partners with InfoUSA and they offer this free expressupdate to get added to CitySearch.
-
I've used all three. Here is my opinion.
Yext is over priced but does give you nice control over you listings. You just need need to weigh if the cost is worth the eyeballs that will ultimately find you on these secondary sites. That answer will be different for everyone.
Localeze is the #1 data distributor in the U.S. and they can help you build a solid core of citations. But to get an enhanced listing with categories, logo, description, etc. it will cost you $300/yr. unless you're part of their partner program. ($3500/yr. entry fee) Definitely worth it if you are doing a large volume of client submissions. NOTE: Localeze along with Yelp provides data to Apple Maps which will be important in the future. If you have a lot of locations, manually claiming on Yelp is going to be a lot of work. With Localeze they'll distribute your information much more efficiently. It will just take longer.
UBL. I've tried this service and honestly I was not impressed. It took forever and a lot of the work they did was half assed. If you're taking local optimization seriously I wouldn't trust them to do this right -- especially for the priority citations and other important accounts. If you don't really care and just want to get something out there then this is an affordable service. I wouldn't do it again though.
Axciom. Acxiom listings are now free for up to 5 locations. Do this yourself and do it right. Don't let UBL do it. Same thing for other data distributors like InfoGroup which is also free and easy to do yourself.
If you don't have time to do this yourself, find a reputable company (like mine) that will do it right for you. Especially the priority citations like Google, Yahoo, Bing, Yelp and others.
-
Doesn't Yext provide you with 30 featured listings rather than regular free listings?
-
Hi Michelleh,
You will find differing opinions on this. Most of the Local SEOs I know use Localeze over UBL these days. I have seen doubts expressed regarding the current value of UBL. I have not used Yext, personally, but recommend you read Mike Blumenthal's recent review of their product:http://blumenthals.com/blog/2012/03/01/yext-local-seo/
I'll quote from Mike's post here:
"Pluses:
-From a management and process point of view for the local SEO the service makes sense. Its fast and efficient and provides some tracking. What would take 6 or 7 hours is done in 15 minutes. If outsourced it would cost in the range of a $100 but the quality and consistency would not be as good.
-It seems to generate between 5 and 6 additional citations that Google thinks are important. Why that should be the case with listings that have already been claimed is not clear.
-The service allows for specials to be easily created and disseminated quickly and things like hours to be changed in a timely fashion.
-There is some reporting and there is decent multilevel management so an SEO can allow clients to access their own reports.
-If a business were to move or change phone numbers it provides a very efficient way of grappling with that issue.
-Whether you use the service or not, Yext’s Local Search Scorecard is a great way to assess NAP consistency across a wide range of sites.
Negatives:
-The reporting is lame. Although in conversations with Yext’s Howard Lerman, they will be adding additional features and color. One of particular interest will be review tracking.
-The cost in and off itself is expensive and it is an annual recurring cost. There is a small reseller discount that starts at only 5% and with enough volume goes up.
- Web traffic from these sites is small compared to Google and even comparing to Bing or Yahoo. But that isn’t Yext’s issue."
I think the main concern with Yext's product is its cost. If you can afford it, it might be a good choice, but as I've said, most of the Local SEOs I know appear to continue to favor Localeze.
And, there is the alternative, as pointed out well by ITRogers, of doing this manually and making your own spreadsheet to keep track of your work. I don't consider this inferior to any product being offered because you have total control over exactly what you are doing. In many cases, manual submission might be the best choice, and if you do it yourself, it is certainly the most affordable!
-
I have had experience with all three.
To answer your question, I think Localeze is the best for distributing your NAP, however, there is no substitute for or better value than manually claiming local citations. It also takes awhile for the listing to get distributed across of their local search platforms.
In my opinion, Yext is overpriced, but is valuable in claiming major citation sources. The number of profiles available are capped. David Mihm recently posted on this: http://www.davidmihm.com/blog/seo-industry/yext-local-marketing/
UBL is good, but I only spend the $39 core syndication annually since they have access to the Acxiom database.
In short, you can pay for all three, but don't just set it and leave it. Always claim and manage as many citations as you can manually. You can take advantage of all of the local search platform's features without overlooking anything.
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
-
An SEO Strategy (need review)
I work in the real estate vertical. My clients possess significant content. Though it's not written. They have tons of images and plenty of videos. They have content in the form of descriptions of homes etc... They don't have written content that would be valuable in an attempt to rank. Most traffic in real estate vertical is [city] real estate and [city] homes for sale. Agents rarely ever use those phrases. Certainly not when doing what they do, promoting their listings. I am thinking I need to build a link building strategy around their videos and photos. There are tons of high domain sources to get links from. With video I could do youtube, vimeo, veoh, daily motion, hulu, etc... All of these sites are DA 90+. None of the links are follow. They would all be no follow. I could have a profile back link, and a back link on each video. So one video distributed to 10 sites would be worth 10 back links. So a client would build hundreds of backlinks a year. All of value. I could deep link all the back links to appropriate subdivision landing pages (long tail). The same strategy is applicable with photos. There are dozens of high DA sites that syndicate images. All would result in a lot of links that are high DA with no-follow. Please discuss this strategy. Also, if you can think of another strategy to build back links for real estate then please share it. I want to discuss real ground level back link building. Not "just build content and they will come." I need the sites to rank. I don't know if no-follows will even help them rank for long tail keywords.
Image & Video Optimization | | AFW11790 -
Local Search Clean up Done. Now Best Way to Index?
I have spent hours doing some local search clean up and have a list of all the URLs to index, about 75. Is there a place I can dump these to get them all indexed quickly or do I have to wait for the hand of Google to come down and bless me with indexing. I don't want to dump all these to Google +, Facebook, or Twitter; that would just be wrong. Any ideas for fast indexing. I want them to all get indexed before the business address changes in a couple years 🙂
Image & Video Optimization | | photoseo10 -
Trying to Merge Google + Local and Google Business Page _ How to?
Hi I have been reading so many posts about merging Google Plus + (Places) accounts and the new Google + Business Pages. I am working with a business who has a verified account in both. How ( and in fact should we try and merge). The old Places page has a review the newly create Business Page does not but is better optimized. Any help would be gratefully received as my head is spinning/ PS based in New Zealand
Image & Video Optimization | | AllieMc0 -
Video SEO, should I do what Roger does?
As per http://www.seomoz.org/blog/hosting-and-embedding-for-video-seo I want to rank with a rich snippet and improve my domain's overall ranking. So I am going to ignore YouTube and use Vimeo Pro (using old embed code). I will also submit a video XML sitemap and implement schema markup. Gotcha. Now let's check this strategy with what SEOmoz is doing. Let's take 5 Steps to Facebook Advertising - Whiteboard Friday it was uploaded onto the SEOmoz blog on 29 March 2013. Then on 4 April 2013 it was uploaded onto YouTube. As at 7 April 2013 (PST) I am not seeing the latest SEOmoz Whiteboard Friday Evolution of the Local Algorithm - Whiteboard Friday posted on YouTube. SEOmoz blog has a person written transcription, YouTube has an automatic transcript. There is a link to the SEOmoz comments below the YouTube Video. Cricky! They've gone all YouTube. Stop the boat. Or should I? My assumption is that SEOmoz is big enough so that it is willing to risk losing a few links to their YouTube webpages. Indeed they delay posting the video on YouTube for a week after it has been posted on the SEOmoz blog. What's more it ensures that there is a very good transcript on their blog. Top that off with comments (and I assume video sitemap and schema) and it is happy it will gain more from the traffic generated from the YouTube community than the potential loss of links to its domain, forgoing potential domain authority increases and resulting traffic. So Roger, I'm a little boat not a SEOmoz battleship cruiser, should I do what you do and wait for a week before I put my videos on YouTube? Or avoid the dangerous currents of YouTube stealing my domain authority and ignore YouTube all together?
Image & Video Optimization | | BruceMcG0 -
Does it affect SEO if my "Menu Label" is a shortened form of my "Page Title"?
This might be a very simple question, but I'm just trying to make sure I don't make Google think I'm trying to pull a fast one. For example, my page title would be "Bridal Fashions", but the menu label would be "fashions" to keep the navigation panel simple and streamlined.
Image & Video Optimization | | MassMedia0 -
Is city name really a no-no in Google+ Local description field?
I know that adding one's city name in the business name and category tags for Google+ Local is a no-no. And Google says so in its quality guidelines. But what about in the business description? I don't see that in Google's guidelines. Can anyone clarify?
Image & Video Optimization | | HammerandHand0 -
New Local Tracking Number for Places vs an 800 Number.
I am having a problem with local search for my business. I submitted the same NAP (Name, Address, Phone) info to Google Places as I have submitted via LocalEZE and Universal Business Listing. Here is the issue. The local number that is being used does not have any way to track calls, meaning the phone company (xo communications) does not give us the number of incoming calls. To add call tracking to the local numbers through our PBX system is very expensive, $2000 per store. Also to transfer this local number to a call tracking company (like callsource or whoiscalling) is a lot of trouble and not an option either. I need to track the call count somehow so I have two options left. 1) Get a new local number (that is also a tracking number through a phone tracking company) and then submit this to Google Places, LocalEZE and Universal Business Listing. The issue with this is that all of our citations will be re-set with a new local number, basically we'd have to do local SEO all over again. 2) Use the main 800 number in Google Places, this can be tracked. However, then our local number is on all of the NAP citations and Google Places will be the only web property with an 800 number. What are your thoughts?
Image & Video Optimization | | qlkasdjfw0 -
Local Search Citations
Hi Is there a checker where it will show what local citation sites a Google Places listing has? My listing has been claimed on the likes of Yelp, Qype etc but I doubt if the others above me have as they have not even claimed their places account The reason being is that it can only be the local citations that is causing the following listing - or if there is anything else I would be interested to learn what it is? http://maps.google.co.uk/maps/place?hl=en&safe=active&prmd=imvns&resnum=5&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&biw=1280&bih=828&wrapid=tlif132205140339110&um=1&ie=UTF-8&q=chartered+accountants+swansea&fb=1&gl=uk&hq=chartered+accountants&hnear=0x486e45555a4e97b1:0x3d77128e2fe7cb74,Swansea,+Neath+Port+Talbot&cid=7535215611406218142&ei=T-fMTvTbC4zA8QOpwLz6Dw&sa=X&oi=local_result&ct=placepage-link&resnum=2&ved=0CEIQ4gkwAQ to appear above http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=chartered%20accountants%20swansea&source=web&cd=7&ved=0CG8QFjAG&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.harrisbassett.co.uk%2Fcontact-harris-bassett.htm&ei=BufMToaLEtTY8QPQ9JjXDw&usg=AFQjCNHH86xx6pmUJ2BBODG_LGHeSL7RYg on a search for chartered accountants swansea
Image & Video Optimization | | idv0