Is it possible to have good SEO without links and with only quality content?
-
Is it possible to have good SEO without links and with only quality content? Have you any experience?
-
Alex, sorry it's taken a bit for us to get this one published -- but I wanted to let you know, this Whiteboard Friday will be published tomorrow morning, 10/24.
-
Possible? Yes. Likely? No. And I'm assuming that by good SEO you mean ranking well in Google.
Links are still the biggest factor for ranking. Matt Cutts repeated this again recently and studies back it up. Don't let the anti-link builders, pro-relationship builders, or whatever they're calling themselves at the moment brainwash you.
-
Hi Chris, Rand, Travis, Zippy and all the fans-moz,
In our agency we have very good results in some sites only with quality content, but ... but only on websites with easy competition and also for the quality of content, are gaining natural links (as it should be :)) .
My answer to the question "Is it possible to have good SEO without links and with only quality content?" is: yes and no.
You can only do a good SEO with quality content that these contents are slowly gaining good links.My answer to the question "Is it possible to have good SEO without linkbuilding and with only without quality content?" is: YES
The link building is a dialogue and not a single order, the link building is an alliance of mutual benefit rather than a purchase. -
...great
-
I've managed a few campaigns where the client had zilch domain age, in a competitive space. My team and I squeezed everything we could out of on-page. The results were in line with my expectations. (Local targeting. The clients showed on the first page within a couple weeks. I have high expectations.)
Granted, we do get a handful of links at the beginning. Not doing so is just crazy talk. Though I realize this is a discussion thread.
What I will say is that I'm getting more traction with less links. So either we're just getting stupid lucky with links, or we've become god-like with on-page. Though I would realistically think that on-page is getting a significant boost and we're doing as well as we've ever done; perhaps a bit better, given experience.
-
Hi Alex,
I've some trepidation about going up against whiteboard Friday but my experience is that it is possible for less competitive keywords. I do inhouse SEO for a company in an industrial B2B market. To a large extent there are few link building opportunities and most of the ones there are on directory sites. There are no blogs and social media is non-existent.
So we target about a 100 keywords that have a moz difficulty of between 17 and 25%. They probably have about 50 - 200 global exact searches a month on Google. A single converting enquiry can lead to $200,000 in sales.
So given that we, and all our competitors, have little support from link building, the battle is all about onpage optimisation. Out of maybe 100 global competitors about 20 have a web presence that is more than trivial. Of these there are 3 companies (including mine) that dominate search rankings (98% of 1-3 positions of the keywords we target are held by one of these 3).
Page and Domain authorities are in the low thirties and many product pages have a PA of 1. Life to a large extent consists in identifying new non obvious keywords for link bait articles that then drive traffic to product pages, and also in taking existing keywords and breaking them apart into more exact matches.
-
Hi Alex - I actually filmed a whiteboard friday about this today! In the next few weeks, you should see it go to the main blog (and I cited you in there - hope that's OK)
-
Alex,
It is possible to have good on-page SEO, meaning that the site is crawalable, copy aligns with meta data, internal linking and navigation are worded correctly, and keyword research was done appropriately. However if the keywords you've chosen to target were also targeted by competitors with sites/pages that have have back links pointing at them, it can be very difficult, if not impossible, to compete against them without sufficient back links of your own. It boils down to the fact that links are an important ranking factor and most of the time (unless you target super-uncompetitive keywords) you need them to be competitive.
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
-
Can I rank without links
Let's say I have great content. I have a great website design (easy to navigate for user) that answers their questions but I have no links. Can I still rank on on a keyword that has a difficulty score of 24. I imagine that I can that google can't penalise me for not having links. Does it mean that without links it will take longer to rank than with links but that google with rank me at some point ? Thank you,
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | seoanalytics0 -
International SEO and duplicate content: what should I do when hreflangs are not enough?
Hi, A follow up question from another one I had a couple of months ago: It has been almost 2 months now that my hreflangs are in place. Google recognises them well and GSC is cleaned (no hreflang errors). Though I've seen some positive changes, I'm quite far from sorting that duplicate content issue completely and some entire sub-folders remain hidden from the SERP.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | GhillC
I believe it happens for two reasons: 1. Fully mirrored content - as per the link to my previous question above, some parts of the site I'm working on are 100% similar. Quite a "gravity issue" here as there is nothing I can do to fix the site architecture nor to get bespoke content in place. 2. Sub-folders "authority". I'm guessing that Google prefers sub-folders over others due to their legacy traffic/history. Meaning that even with hreflangs in place, the older sub-folder would rank over the right one because Google believes it provides better results to its users. Two questions from these reasons:
1. Is the latter correct? Am I guessing correctly re "sub-folders" authority (if such thing exists) or am I simply wrong? 2. Can I solve this using canonical tags?
Instead of trying to fix and "promote" hidden sub-folders, I'm thinking to actually reinforce the results I'm getting from stronger sub-folders.
I.e: if a user based in belgium is Googling something relating to my site, the site.com/fr/ subfolder shows up instead of the site.com/be/fr/ sub-sub-folder.
Or if someone is based in Belgium using Dutch, he would get site.com/nl/ results instead of the site.com/be/nl/ sub-sub-folder. Therefore, I could canonicalise /be/fr/ to /fr/ and do something similar for that second one. I'd prefer traffic coming to the right part of the site for tracking and analytic reasons. However, instead of trying to move mountain by changing Google's behaviour (if ever I could do this?), I'm thinking to encourage the current flow (also because it's not completely wrong as it brings traffic to pages featuring the correct language no matter what). That second question is the main reason why I'm looking out for MoZ's community advice: am I going to damage the site badly by using canonical tags that way? Thank you so much!
G0 -
Link conundrum - losing nav/footer links in mobile view
Hi Moz folks! I'm currently moving a site from being hosted on www. and m. separately to a responsive single URL. The problem is, the desktop version currently has links to important landing pages in the footer (about 60) and that's not something we want to replicate on mobile (mainly because it will look pretty awful.) There is no navigation menu because the key to the homepage is to convert users to subscription so any distraction reduces conversion rate. The footer links will continue to exist on the desktop view but, since Google's mobile-first index, presumably we lose these important homepage links to our most important pages. So, my questions: Do you think there is any SEO value in the desktop footer links? Do you have any suggestions about how best to include these 60-odd links in a way that works for mobile? Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | d_foley0 -
Does Navigation Bar have an effect on the link juice and the number of internal links?
Hi Moz community, I am getting the "Avoid Too Many Internal Links" error from Moz for most of my pages and Google declared the max number as 100 internal links. However, most of my pages can't have internal links less than 100, since it is a commercial website and there are many categories that I have to show to my visitors by using the drop down navigation bar. Without counting the links in the navigation bar, the number of internal links is below 100. I am wondering if the navigation bar links affect the link juice and counted as internal links by Google. The Same question also applies to the links in the footer. Additionally, how about the products? I have hundreds of products in the category pages and even though I use pagination I still have many links in the category pages (probably more than 100 without even counting the navigation bar links). Does Google count the product links as internal links and how about the effect on the link juice? Here is the website if you want to take a look: http://www.goldstore.com.tr Thank you for your answers.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | onurcan-ikiz0 -
'Nofollow' footer links from another site, are they 'bad' links?
Hi everyone,
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | romanbond
one of my sites has about 1000 'nofollow' links from the footer of another of my sites. Are these in any way hurtful? Any help appreciated..0 -
Do you think Link:Content Ratio counts in SEO?
We posted the same question in Quora. But hope to get responses or test results from SEOMOzers. This might help Google for identifying: High Link:Content Ratio = Parked Domain
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | arousta
Moderate Link:Content Ratio = Directory Site
Relatively High Link:Content Ratio = Normal Website
Very High Link:Content Ratio = Article page or Blog Do you think Google is using it, especially during Panda Update? I am trying to find a reasonable cause of many situations like the PR of deep links or category pages in Directory sites has vanished. And if that has something to do with it.0 -
In-House SEO - Doubt about one SEO issue - Plz guys help over here =)
Hello, We wanna promote some of our software's. I will give u guys one example bellow: http://www.mediavideoconverter.de/pdf-to-epub-converter.html We also have this domain: http://pdftoepub.de/ How can we deal about the duplicate content, and also how can we improve the first domain product page. If I use the canonical and don't index the second domain and make a link to the first domain it will help anyway? or don't make any difference? keyword: pdf to epub , pdf to epub converter What u guys think about this technique ? Good / Bad ? Is there the second domain giving any value to the first domain page? Thanks in advance.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | augustos0 -
RSS feeds- What are the secrets to getting them, and the links inside then, indexed and counted for SEO purposes?
RSS feeds, at least on paper, should be a great way to build backlinks and boost rankings. They are also very seductive from a link-builder's point of view- free, easy to create, allows you to specifiy anchor text, etc. There are even several SEO articles, anda few products, extolling the virtues of RSS for SEO puposes. However, I hear anecdotedly that they are extremely ineffective in getting their internal links indexed. And my success rate has been abysmal- perhaps 15% have ever been indexed,and so far, I havenever seem Google show an RSS feed as a source for a backlink. I have even thrown some token backlinks against RSS feeds to see if that helped in getting them indexed, but even that has a very low success rate. I recently read a blog post saying that Google "hates aRSS feeds" and "rarely spiders perhaps the first link or two." Yet there are many SEO advocates who claim that RSS feeds are a great untapped resource for SEO. I am rather befuddled. Has anyone "crackedthe code" onhow to get them,and the links that they contain, indexed and helping rankings?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | tclendaniel0