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
-
What are the lowest acceptable metrics for a link?
I understand there is a subjective, human factor when deciding to link to/from a site. Nonetheless, what are the lowest Moz or Majestic metrics that are acceptable when building links. At what point do you say this site doesn't have the profile I would want? I am looking to clean up the backlink profile of a site. Also, I would like to set a criteria for building links in the future. I appreciate your thoughts on metrics when it comes to link building.
Technical SEO | | inhouseseo0 -
Spam links - which link is most damaging to my rankings.
I have just started using Open Site Explorer and discovered a lot of spam links to my website.
Technical SEO | | A.Ronny
(I have mostly ranked on page for many years one but in the last two weeks ranking have dropped to page two)
The links have Anchor Text such as Scam - Dishonest - Drugs. Most of the of the links are "nofollow".
Will links with "nofollow" affect my ranking and if so which of the links should i priorities to remove?
Do I look at Link Equity - Domain Authority - Page Authority or other criteria? Many thanks
Ronny0 -
So many internal links to the same page
Hey guyz,
Technical SEO | | atakala
I'm working with a client that has a page which has many internal links to the same page .
Let me illustrate it.
So as you can see I have a page which is called in the image "page" :D.
As you can see, the **page **has many links to the solutions.htmls' anchor links which mean they are basically the same page ( solutions.html)
Is it going to be a problem for us to do that ?
And is there anyway to handle this problem?
Thank you for you patience. And sorry for my bad english 😄 4deRc1W.png0 -
Navigation links tagged as H3
I'm reviewing a website that has used the H3 tag in the Navigation Menu. I've not seen that before and first thought is it is a dodgy. Tags should relate to content on the page not link to another page. As a result of using H3 in Nav the ratio of content wrapped in Heading tags vs body content is quite high. My recommendation is to remove H3 tag from Nav but having searched Moz and not finding an article to verify that recommendation thought I'd ask the question.
Technical SEO | | NicDale0 -
Unwanted spam pharmacy links
Somebody has been building spam pharmacy links to one of our client sites. I presume they hacked the site and were trying to get their injected pages to rank for pharmacy keywords. The hack appears to be gone now, but we will check more code to be sure. However, we're still left with a bunch of really spammy links, with pharmacy related anchor texts. Anyone had any experience dealing with this? Did the links hurt your rankings? How did you get rid of or mitigate them?
Technical SEO | | AdamThompson0 -
Bookmark and link submission -DripFeedBlasts.com
Can you please advise me on services that submit urls for socialbookmarks, directories and various back links. Such as DripFeedBlasts.com , I seem to be running across quite a few different services that appear to be legitimate but I'm obviously suspicious of anything that seems too easy. Have you guys hear of dripfeedblasts and do you have any recommendations for this type of tool, or would you suggest staying away from them all together. I'm a novice and trying to learn time saving strategies to save on hiring additional manpower. Thanks
Technical SEO | | jjwelu0 -
A Puzzling Link
I'm stumped and I'm hoping some mozzers will be able to help. I run our company blog (http://scottymacblog.com/). The last couple of days I have noticed that the blog is receiving some traffic from cnn.com. I looked, but cannot find any mention of the blog on cnn. Adding to my frustration is that the content on cnn is constantly changing. Our blog doesn't do any sort of advertising and no one affiliated with the blog posts on cnn. As great as it is to be getting traffic from such a valued source, I have no idea why. Has something like this happened to (for?) anyone else? Any ideas on how I can research the source of the link? Thanks in advance!
Technical SEO | | EssEEmily0 -
What do you do about links to constantly moving pages?
One of the sites I work for is an employment site, they have a job database and the job pages tend to get links. The problem is that every time one of these jobs is filled, the job page goes away. What should I do to keep the value from these links?
Technical SEO | | MarloSchneider0