I am really surprised to see this page is ranking like crazy even the content is very thin
-
We are ranking for 121KW for this page. And 22KW are ranking in the 1-3 position. I am not able to understand why will it rank like anything. Considering that it has just 4 inbound links.
Will some help me to understand this mystery. When we try to write a good in-depth content then we are not ranking but for such content, we are doing fairly good.
-
Thanks, Buddy!
-
Sure, no problem I'll take a look now!
So **this is your post URL: **<a>https://www.hackerearth.com/recruit/resources/e-books/a-complete-guide-to-talent-assessment-software/</a>
This time Moz Link Explorer has only detected one backlink to the post.
The link is from: https://www.yasteq.com/US/Fremont/123161387835128/HackerEarth
The site describes itself thusly: "One of the largest resources on the Internet for finding computer & electronics services and related businesses, worldwide." - so basically it's a local-themed business directory with a tech focus and content curation elements. You can tell that more easily by looking at the homepage (https://www.yasteq.com/). It only has 18 domain authority so that's pretty weak to be honest. The listing is relevant with a reasonable write-up - but it's from a place no one really cares about.
Majestic SEO (another tool) found this link: https://www.eventshigh.com/detail/Bangalore/48e3b2743f568bd46a83bb182fe91ce8-djangothon?src=ecbox whilst **Ahrefs found a separate link from the same site here: **https://www.eventshigh.com/detail/bangalore/63c53417b3eadb328fa3d568d970624c-travel-tech-meetup-with-goibibo
At a glance these just seem to be simple events listings. In most instances, links from these listings are either image-based or have no-follow set to true. Contrary to popular opinion, 'no-following' links does not prevent or discourage users or search engines from following a link (probably one of the worst named attribute values ever). What it does is it prevents Google from transferring any link equity (or 'SEO juice') through the link. The linking page (which hosts the hyperlink) will still lose some SEO authority, but at the receiving end you won't be gaining any (it just gets vented into cyberspace).
Seeing as the page hosting a hyperlink loses SEO equity either way (a measure taken by Google to stop PageRank sculpting from actually 'being a thing') - the only reason to no-follow hyperlinks these days is to avoid outbound Penguin penalties. This is where you are selling hyperlinks but want to tell Google "this link is somehow commercial or advertorial in nature, so don't weight it into your SEO ranking algorithm(s) for Google's results". Google will take that on board and it will prevent the link-host from garnering a penalty (for selling links to others with the intention of manipulating rankings, kind of like being labelled a drug dealer)
The domain actually has very strong metrics in Ahrefs, earning an Ahrefs domain rating of 70. They are probably aware of their site's SEO-clout and either don't want to be giving you a free ride (they expect you to pay for the equity) or they're very cautious about how they link, not wanting to lose the established authority they have built up via penalty / manual action. In any case, though the site is strong and you have links from it - those links are not sending you much / any SEO equity - so there's no party here amigo. Image-based links tend to transfer less equity anyway (even forgetting about 'nofollow') and they have no (user-visible) anchor-text to explain their relevance. Search engines do use image links as signals, but they're not such strong signals (as they're more ambiguous in general)
Ahrefs also found two links from "Mail Pug":
Both have a Domain Rating and URL Rating of zero in Ahrefs. Content doesn't actually seem that bad but... it's from a site with no equity to give you.
In basic terms, your really decent contextual (content-based) links are from sites no one cares about. On the one site with high metrics, they're refusing to transfer SEO equity to you for one reason or another. As such, no rankings for this post.
The reason why it's not ranking well is that although it may be detailed and well written, unlike your other post it didn't attract links. As such it's not deemed very shareable and it has very little SEO authority. You might say it's a vehicle with no fuel.
The reasons why it attracted no 'significant' buzz or attention online could be variable. Was it promoted as well as the other post? Like you suggest - were there CRO or UX defects in the design or copy of the content? I'll leave that side to you.
-
Ah man I love stuff like this!
Ok so here's your post: https://www.hackerearth.com/blog/artificial-intelligence/artificial-intelligence-101-how-to-get-started/
Now I can see you think this post only has four inbound links and you have drawn that conclusion from Moz Link Explorer. By the way I think Moz's tool is great. My agency wouldn't have a subscription otherwise! BUT - MLE (Moz Link Explorer) doesn't have a complete picture of all links on the web. Even Google doesn't have this (yet - their MO is to 'index the web' though).
There are several platforms which aim to supply 'backlink' (external links) data. Moz is one platform but there are others. All of these platforms or link-explorer tools, are coded to crawl the web in different ways. They all have their own unique philosophy on how to index the the 'important' links on the web more quickly. I'm not going to get into whether certain tools are better or worse, really you need **a few of them **so that you can aggregate and de-dupe your own data!
From Moz we can see that these URLs are linking to your post:
- http://blog.crescenttechnologyconsultants.com/artificial-intelligence-101-how-to-get-started/
- https://blog.steppingblocks.com/the-tools-that-saved-me-thousands
- http://analyticstraining.com/the-best-way-to-learn-ai-and-ml/
- https://analyticstraining.com/the-best-way-to-learn-ai-and-ml/
Really that's only three pages as the last two entries there are the same page being served via different protocols (HTTP vs HTTPS).
What do other tools have to say about your post?
Well I can tell you that another tools (Ahrefs) claims to have found more live links for this particular URL. That's not to say that it always will find more links overall, but in this instance it has.
Ahrefs believes that you have 10 live links (more than 4) from 8 domains.
I'll list the domains for your reference:
- refind.com
- steppingblocks.com
- analyticstraining.com
- innovify.com
- snyxius.com
- techgenies.com
- grokbase.com
- malware.xyz
In particular "refind.com" and "grokbase.com" have pretty high SEO authority metrics! These two were not picked up by MLE but will invariably have been factored by Google.
This is the link from "refind.com": https://refind.com/TinaTran_au/collections/ai - it looks pretty weird! If you go to the base-level homepage (https://refind.com/) you can see that the site is an effective content curation network with social aspects. It's likely that when your post was added by users or editors; at some point it featured on the homepage. If so that would have driven a pretty hefty whack of SEO-juice to your post. It may be worth uncovering how this network operates and seeing if you can get in with them, leverage the platform further. Turn fluke into process...
Here's the link from GrokBase: https://grokbase.com/t/gg/django-users/13a438tgw5/inconsistency-in-model-field-with-file-storage-on-amazon-s3 - seems a bit more 'on-point'. But what the heck is GrockBase? Let's go back to the home URL (https://grokbase.com/). Here's what they have to say about themselves: "Grokbase is a growing mailing list archive that facilitates __discovery of discussions and users within and across groups." - it doesn't mean huge amounts to me, maybe it will mean more to you. What ever it is, even though it looks a bit rough and simplistic - it seems to be popular. It **looks **a bit like some kind of Reddit knock-off. Maybe I'm just being ignorant and it was well established on Web 1.0. Do some digging, see what you can find. I wanted to take this further for you by looking in SEMRush (another tool) to get an estimate of the domain's traffic. Sadly it seems to be down or having problems right now.
Another popular link-indexing tool (Majestic) has **no information **on your post, so clearly both Moz and Ahrefs index your site more efficiently in terms of backlinks and the particular sites which you network with.
This was another interesting link found by Ahrefs: https://www.snyxius.com/where-to-begin-with-ai-development/ - Ctrl + F for the anchor text of "different industries and processes" and you'll find the link to your own article. It seems like a contextual link from a well established app / software development company in Austin, Tx. Guess what you wrote resonated.
It's not about volume of links, it's about the **quality **of backlinks. Either your links are high in quality for this post, or you have beaten the system somehow. Either way - congratulations
-
As I see you have some really good links but most important you have really good anchor text
- artificial intelligence
- artificial intelligence 101: how to get started
One of those anchor text is your Headline / Title which according to Adam White is the most valuable backlink type
If you want to understand how important are the anchor texts on your backlinks please read this articles The Single Best Anchor Text for SEO That No One Is Talking About
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
-
Local SEO - ranking the same page for multiple locations
Hi everyone, I am aware that issue of local SEO has been approached numerous times, but the situation that I'm dealing with is slightly different, so I'd love to receive your expert advice. I'm running the website of a property management company which services multiple locations (www.homevault.com). From our local offices in the city center, we also service neighboring towns and communities ( ex: we have an office in Charlotte NC, from which we service Charlotte plus a dozen other towns nearby). We wanted to avoid creating dozens of extra local service pages, particularly since our offers are identical per metropolitan area and we're talking of 20-30 additional local pages for each area. Instead, we decided to create local service pages only for the main locations. Needless to say, we're now ranking for the main locations, but we're missing on all searches for property management in neighboring towns (we're doing good on searches such as 'charlotte property management', but we're practically invisible for 'davidson property management', although we're searvicing that area as well). What we've done so far to try and fix the situation: 1. The current location pages do include descriptions of areas that we serve. 2. We've included 1-2 keywords for the sattelite locations in the main location pages, but we're nowhere near the optimization needed to rank for local searches in neighboring towns (ie, some main local service pages rank on pages 2-4 for sattelite towns, so not good enough). 3. We've included the searviced areas in our local GMBs, directories, social media profiles etc. None of these solutions appear to work great. Should I go ahead and create the classic local pages for each and every town and optimize them on those particular keywords, even if the offer is practically the same, and the number of pages risks going out of control? Any other better ideas? Many thanks in advance!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | HomeVaultPM0 -
Non-optimised pages ranking higher than optimised homepage
I'm a developer working with a dating site and we're having what appear to be unusual ranking behaviour for the keyword "Ukraine Brides". When searching for "Ukraine Brides" we typically have the top 3 results in Google, however the homepage is almost never ranked #1. Other non-optimised pages appear ahead of it. I believe this is having a negative affect on our conversion rate, so wish to see this resolved. For instance, if you search here in NZ, the results are typically: Login page (/account/login) Search page (/search) Home page (/) Similar situation when searching in the US, but typically the top result is the search page. Is this unusual? We've spent quite a bit of time optimising the homepage, it has more external links, more internal links, better content that targets the keyword, more traffic, etc. Even so, the login and search pages appear higher. A side note, the average CTR for "Ukraine Brides" is significantly lower than "Ukraine Brides Agency" (20% vs 80% respectively), so I don't think that it's purely a 'brand keyword'. A few thoughts were: The search page is not accessible from the homepage unless you are logged in. Maybe this is causing some sort of linking/seo/ranking issue? Re: the login page being higher, perhaps many existing users visit the login page directly from this keyword in order to login straight away so Google pushes this to the top. I think this is less likely because most existing users will be logged in automatically (via cookies "remember me") and the homepage has a login form in anycase The site supports multiple languages. Maybe this is causing some canonical issues? There was an additional suggestion that we should noindex the login and search pages in order to resolve this ranking issue, but were nervous that we'd lose a large amount of organic clicks if we did this. Google must be doing this for a reason, so we wanted to resolve that underlying reason before dropping the noindex hammer. The fear is of course that we've done something wrong with our homepage which is causing it to perform poorly and thus these other pages rank higher. The hope would be that if we fixed that, that our rank for other keywords would improve also. It would be great if we could get some more eyes on this to hopefully confirm we're not doing anything silly, and are just generally after a second opinion.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | andrew_uba0 -
How to 301 Redirect /page.php to /page, after a RewriteRule has already made /page.php accessible by /page (Getting errors)
A site has its URLs with php extensions, like this: example.com/page.php I used the following rewrite to remove the extension so that the page can now be accessed from example.com/page RewriteCond %{REQUEST_FILENAME}.php -f
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | rcseo
RewriteRule ^(.*)$ $1.php [L] It works great. I can access it via the example.com/page URL. However, the problem is the page can still be accessed from example.com/page.php. Because I have external links going to the page, I want to 301 redirect example.com/page.php to example.com/page. I've tried this a couple of ways but I get redirect loops or 500 internal server errors. Is there a way to have both? Remove the extension and 301 the .php to no extension? By the way, if it matters, page.php is an actual file in the root directory (not created through another rewrite or URI routing). I'm hoping I can do this, and not just throw a example.com/page canonical tag on the page. Thanks!0 -
Are links on the page like this detrimental?
Hello, on www.ditalia.com.au are the links at the bottom of the page under: Latest Blog Posts, Most Popular Blogs, Fabric & Lace, Wedding Dresses..., useful or detrimental to SEO?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | infinart0 -
Using unique content from "rel=canonical"ized page
Hey everyone, I have a question about the following scenario: Page 1: Text A, Text B, Text C Page 2 (rel=canonical to Page 1): Text A, Text B, Text C, Text D Much of the content on page 2 is "rel=canonical"ized to page 1 to signalize duplicate content. However, Page 2 also contains some unique text not found in Page 1. How safe is it to use the unique content from Page 2 on a new page (Page 3) if the intention is to rank Page 3? Does that make any sense? 🙂
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ipancake0 -
Duplicate peices of content on multiple pages - is this a problem
I have a couple of WordPress clients with the same issue but caused in different ways: 1. The Slash WP theme which is a portfolio theme, involves setting up multiple excerpts of content that can then be added to multiple pages. So although the pages themselves are not identical, there are the same snippets of content appearing on multiple pages 2. A WP blog which has multiple categories and/or tags for each post, effectively ends up with many pages showing duplicate excerpts of content. My view has always been to noindex these pages (via Yoast), but was advised recently not to. In both these cases, even though the pages are not identical, do you think this duplicate content across multiple pages could cause an issue? All thoughts appreciated
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Chammy0 -
Does title text of homepage effect ranking of sub pages?
Question is pretty much summed up in the title. I realize that title text on a specific page can effect the ranking of that page. But what I'm getting a feeling of lately is that google uses the title text of your homepage to effect the ranking of the site on a whole. Thoughts?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | adriandg1