Moz Q&A is closed.
After more than 13 years, and tens of thousands of questions, Moz Q&A closed on 12th December 2024. Whilst we’re not completely removing the content - many posts will still be possible to view - we have locked both new posts and new replies. More details here.
Title Tag vs. H1 / H2
-
OK, Title tag, no problem, it's the SEO juice, appears on SERP, etc. Got it.
But I'm reading up on H1 and getting conflicting bits of information ...
- Only use H1 once?
- H1 is crucial for SERP
- Use H1s for subheads
- Google almost never looks past H2 for relevance
So say I've got a blog post with three sections ... do I use H1 three times (or does Google think you're playing them ...)
Or do I create a "big" H1 subhead and then use H2s? Or just use all H2s because H1s are scary?
I frequently use subheads, it would seem weird to me to have one a font size bigger than another, but of course I can adjust that in settings ...
Thoughts?
Lisa
-
Let me add that
- In many cases the title tag will also contain the website's name, as in
<title>Awesome Cool Headline | website name<title></li> <li>A good CMS will let you differentiate between headline in title and headline on the page (the H1)</li> <li>If your website is indexed by Google News the shown headline will be the H1, not the title tag</li> </ul></title>
- In many cases the title tag will also contain the website's name, as in
-
<title>Awesome Cool Headline<title></p> <p><H1>Awesome Cool Headline<H1></p> <p>This looks correct. Then use H2 for subheadings. The title won't get printed on the page so "Awesome Cool Headline" will only show once on the page content.</p></title>
-
OK, getting more information ... I think the issue here is this is for a blog and I'm thinking the Title tag usurps the H1.
For a blog, it would be:
<title>Awesome Cool Headline<title></p> <p><H1>Awesome Cool Headline<H1></p> <p>which would look redundant. So I think I could use the first subhead as an H1 if it was written in a way that was relevant to the story, but I'm guessing best practices are H2. Although if I did that, I'd NEVER have an H1 on my pages unless I was doing a landing page promotion of some sort ... hmmm.</p></title>
-
Ah, so ...
- Title (duh)
- H1 header (use as first subhead after lead graph to set the tone for the piece?)
- H2 for all other subheads
- Set H1 and H2 at the same font style so no one knows the difference.
Can someone give me a good example of an H1? I don't know why I'm a bit stuck on the H1 application, but a few in the wild examples should help. This is truly appreciated guys!
Thanks!
-
Like others have mentioned you should only have one H1. This should appear on the page before any other headings such as h2, h3 etc.
The styling shouldn't matter so the h1 doesn't need to be in a larger font size than the h2's.
-
Of the 4 points you mention you've seen, I'd say the only one that's entirely incorrect is #3.
1. Only use H1 once: True. Think of it like a book title. That's the most important thing, so nothing else should share that prominence.
2. H1 is crucial for SERP: **True. **This is what Google looks to, after your title tag, for information about your page and the content therein. This reaffirms that your metadata, keywords, title, content, etc. are all related - while also showing visitors what this page is about (Google values visitor experience more and more with each update).
3. Use H1s for subheads. False. Think back to #1 - H1 should be reserved only for the 1 absolute most important thing (which should be your title).
4. Google almost never looks past H2 for relevance. Kind of true. Google DOES look beyond this (and even parses your body-text), but with each lowering of prominence / heading, Google gives it less weight. #4 is true in the sense that this weight is lessened significantly, but it's incorrect generally - your content is still very important.
I hope this has been helpful to you! Good luck!
-
Just use H1 one time, matt cutts said in a video that he would like to see only 1 H1 tag on a page.
Create content for better user experience, use headings just for your readers, and don't follow these on page tactics very much. Now everyone knows these techniques, and I don't think Google gives higher weight to these things.
Create content for readers
Use H1 as your Page's Heading(Just one time)
Use H2 where you think it's essential
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
-
SEO advice on ecommerce url structure where categories contain "/c/"
Hi! We use Hybris as plattform and I would like input on which url to choose. We must keep "/c/" before the actual category. c stands for category. I.e. this current url format will be shortened and cleaned:
Technical SEO | | hampgunn
https://www.granngarden.se/Sortiment/Husdjur/Hund/Hundfoder-%26-Hundmat/c/hundfoder To either: a.
https://www.granngarden.se/husdjur/hund/hundfoder/c/hundfoder b.
https://www.granngarden.se/husdjur/hund/c/hundfoder (hundfoder means dogfood) The question is whether we should keep the duplicated category name (hundfoder) before the "/c/" or not. Will there be SEO disadvantages by removing the duplicate "hundfoder" before the "/c/"? I prefer the shorter version ofc, but do not want to jeopardize any SEO rankings or send confusing signals to search engines or customers due to the "/c/" breaking up the url breadcrumb. What do you guys say and prefer from the above alternatives? Thanks /Hampus0 -
Www2 vs www problem
Hi, I have a website that has an old version and a new version. The content is not duplicate on the different versions.
Technical SEO | | TihomirPetrov
The point is that the old version uses www. and non-www before the domain and the new one uses www2. My questions is: Is that a problem and what should be done? Thank you in advance!0 -
Isnt it better to have headlines in H1 and H2 tags instead of p tags?
I am working with a simple site http://http://lightsigns.com/Uniko_Manufacturing_Limited.html They seek more SEO traffic. However, the two big headlines that read "Wholesale Supply to the Sign and Display Industries" which is on line 241 and 242 of the source code, its in a p tag, i.e. <p <span class="webkit-html-tag">style</p <span>="padding-top: 0pt; " class="paragraph_style_1">Wholesale Supply to the and <p <span class="webkit-html-tag">style</p <span>="padding-bottom: 0pt; " class="paragraph_style_1">Sign and Display Industries Likewise, the product titles are in p tags, also. For example, on the Slide-in Light Box product page, http://lightsigns.com/Slide_In_light_box.html , I have done keyword research and no one is using the words slide in light box.Plus, it is also a p tag, ie. line 43 reads style="padding-bottom: 0pt; padding-top: 0pt; " class="paragraph_style">Slide-in Light Box If I suggest that they make an H2 tag with SEO-optimized keywords such as Display Light Box - Slide-In LIght Box, would this indeed help SEO? In summary, is it correct to say that H1 and H2 tags are stronger signals to the search bots of what the page is about?
Technical SEO | | BridgetGibbons1 -
Can you have a /sitemap.xml and /sitemap.html on the same site?
Thanks in advance for any responses; we really appreciate the expertise of the SEOmoz community! My question: Since the file extensions are different, can a site have both a /sitemap.xml and /sitemap.html both siting at the root domain? For example, we've already put the html sitemap in place here: https://www.pioneermilitaryloans.com/sitemap Now, we're considering adding an XML sitemap. I know standard practice is to load it at the root (www.example.com/sitemap.xml), but am wondering if this will cause conflicts. I've been unable to find this topic addressed anywhere, or any real-life examples of sites currently doing this. What do you think?
Technical SEO | | PioneerServices0 -
Duplicate title-tags with pagination and canonical
Some time back we implemented the Google recommendation for pagination (the rel="next/prev"). GWMT now reports 17K pages with duplicate title-tags (we have about 1,1m products on our site and about 50m pages indexed in Google) As an example we have properties listed in various states and the category title would be "Properties for Sale in [state-name]". A paginated search page or browsing a category (see also http://searchengineland.com/implementing-pagination-attributes-correctly-for-google-114970) would then include the following: The title for each page is the same - so to avoid the duplicate title-tags issue, I would think one would have the following options: Ignore what Google says Change the canonical to http://www.site.com/property/state.html (which would then only show the first XX results) Append a page number to the title "Properties for Sale in [state-name] | Page XX" Have all paginated pages use noindex,follow - this would then result in no category page being indexed Would you have the canonical point to the individual paginated page or the base page?
Technical SEO | | MagicDude4Eva2 -
Home Page .index.htm and .com Duplicate Page Content/Title
I have been whittling away at the duplicate content on my clients' sites, thanks to SEOmoz's pro report, and have been getting push back from the account manager at register.com (the site was built here and the owner doesn't want to move it). He says these are the exact same page and he can't access one to redirect to the other. Any suggestions? The SEOmoz report says there is duplicate content on both these urls: Durango Mountain Biking | Durango Mountain Resort - Cascade Village http://www.cascadevillagehotel.com/index.htm Durango Mountain Biking | Durango Mountain Resort - Cascade Village http://www.cascadevillagehotel.com/ Your help is greatly appreciated! Sheryl
Technical SEO | | TOMMarketingLtd.0 -
Internal search : rel=canonical vs noindex vs robots.txt
Hi everyone, I have a website with a lot of internal search results pages indexed. I'm not asking if they should be indexed or not, I know they should not according to Google's guidelines. And they make a bunch of duplicated pages so I want to solve this problem. The thing is, if I noindex them, the site is gonna lose a non-negligible chunk of traffic : nearly 13% according to google analytics !!! I thought of blocking them in robots.txt. This solution would not keep them out of the index. But the pages appearing in GG SERPS would then look empty (no title, no description), thus their CTR would plummet and I would lose a bit of traffic too... The last idea I had was to use a rel=canonical tag pointing to the original search page (that is empty, without results), but it would probably have the same effect as noindexing them, wouldn't it ? (never tried so I'm not sure of this) Of course I did some research on the subject, but each of my finding recommanded one of the 3 methods only ! One even recommanded noindex+robots.txt block which is stupid because the noindex would then be useless... Is there somebody who can tell me which option is the best to keep this traffic ? Thanks a million
Technical SEO | | JohannCR0 -
Sitefinity vs Wordpress
We're looking for a new CMS and out development company suggested Sitefinity. I've had great success with Wordpress. Is either system better. I love worpdress but have had no experience with Sitefinity. Thanks!
Technical SEO | | StandUpCubicles0