Some URLs in the sitemap not indexed
-
Our company site has hundreds of thousands of pages. Yet no matter how big or small the total page count, I have found that the "URLs Indexed" in GWMT has never matched "URLS in Sitemap". When we were small and now that we have a LOT more pages, there is always a discrepancy of ~10% or so missing from the index.
It's difficult to know which pages are not indexed, but I have found some that I can verify are in the Sitemap.xml file but not at all in the index. When I go to GWMT I can "Fetch and Render" missing pages fine - it's not as though it's blocked or inaccessible.
Any ideas on why this is? Is this type of discrepancy typical?
-
Thanks. Very helpful!
-
This is great to know that 10% is a good discrepancy. Hard to know otherwise.
That article about Screaming Frog is super helpful, thanks!
-
I have never had a site with 100% crawled pages, sometimes Google will drop a page off for being too similar to another, not informative enough, canonical links set, redirects.
As Ryan says, don't just rely on Moz use Screaming Frog to get a good view of your site too, see if there are any errors. Also you can run the frog whenever you like, it's just a little more technical to understand.
Xenu oooh never heard of that one Ryan thanks!
Just looked into Xenu, Screaming frog does it all and some.
-
Hi Mase,
I've managed sites with with hundreds of thousands of pages too, and in my experience a discrepancy between what's offered up via the sitemaps and what gets indexed is typical (dare I say it, a 10% discrepancy seems pretty good!). Pages deeper in the site seem to suffer this fate more frequently than those with fewer subfolders, as do those with thin content.
I agree completely with Ryan's comment about Screaming Frog: it is an invaluable tool for site audits, in addition to lots of other useful site insights. You might find this article interesting to get a sense of the many ways you can use SF: http://www.seerinteractive.com/blog/screaming-frog-guide/
-
You're welcome. Definitely take a look at a crawler that gives you more insight, especially with a site as large as yours. Just note, no matter what you might never achieve an exact match between the pages you've submitted and the number indexed as Google can decide not to index a page for other reasons aside from the page's presence in a site map. Something useful for you as well would be to look at how many of your pages recieve visits in analytics. That will give you an idea of percentages on pages in the sitemap vs the index vs active.
-
I have not run the site through those tools you mentioned, I'm unfamiliar.
I am not, however, receiving any errors on those pages. And when I "Fetch and Render" in GWMT, they look and render fine without errors. I'm able to submit them to the index one-by-one.
Thanks for your response, Ryan.
-
Hi Mase. Are you getting errors on URLs you've submitted? Or ran other crawlers on your site like Xenu or ScreamingFrog to produce any possible errors? It's also good to know which pages might not have enough content to be indexed: filters, sorting views, etc.
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
-
Canonicalization, does it still index
If I have 2 pages that are identical but on different domains that our team manages, if we place a rel=canonical tag on the page we prefer/should display, will the page that doesn't have the canonical tag still be indexed and show on SERPs?
Technical SEO | | kroe10 -
Changing Urls
Hi All, I have a question I hope someone can help me with. I ran a scan on a website and it has a stack of urls that are far too long. I am going through and changing the urls to shorter ones. But my question is regarding redirections. Wordpress seems to be automatically redirecting the old urls to the new ones, should i be adding a more solid 301 in as well or is the wordpress redirect enough? I ask as they dont all seem to stay redirecting Thanks in advance for the help
Technical SEO | | DaleZon2 -
Why are my images not being indexed?
I have submitted an image sitemap with over 2,000 images yet only about 35 have been indexed. Could you please help me understand why Google is not indexing my images? www.creative-calendars.com
Technical SEO | | nicole20140 -
Keywords, when are you overdoing it in the URL?
Hi guys, I'm auditing a site covering compensation for cancer. Keywords could include: Undiagnosed cancer 20 cancer compensation 10 undiagnosed cancer symptoms 10 cancer misdiagnosis claims 20 cancer claims 10 misdiagnosis of cancer 50 cancer misdiagnosis 70 So, when structuring the URL for the category, this was previously selected: www.site.co.uk/medical-negligence/cancer-misdiagnosis Although sub-pages appear like this: www.site.co.uk/medical-negligence/cancer-misdiagnosis/breast-cancer-misdiagnosis-claim/ 'Cancer misdiagnosis' as a keyword attracts the most traffic, but if we're using it on sub-pages - is there a need to include it twice on all sub-page URLs? With that in mind, would it be better to follow the following format? www.site.co.uk/medical-negligence/cancer-compensation www.site.co.uk/medical-negligence/cancer-compensation/breast-cancer-misdiagnosis-claim/ Or is there a better way to structure this? Thanks in advance guys!
Technical SEO | | Muhammad-Isap0 -
My beta site (beta.website.com) has been inadvertently indexed. Its cached pages are taking traffic away from our real website (website.com). Should I just "NO INDEX" the entire beta site and if so, what's the best way to do this? Please advise.
My beta site (beta.website.com) has been inadvertently indexed. Its cached pages are taking traffic away from our real website (website.com). Should I just "NO INDEX" the entire beta site and if so, what's the best way to do this? Are there any other precautions I should be taking? Please advise.
Technical SEO | | BVREID0 -
Second URL
Hi We have a .com and a .co.uk Main website is .co.uk, we also have a landing page for the .com If we redirect the .com to the .co.uk, will it create duplicate content ... May seem like a silly question, but want to be sure that that the visitors cant access our website at both urls, as that would be duplicate content Thanks in advance John
Technical SEO | | Johnny4B0 -
URL restructure and phasing out HTML sitemap
Hi SEOMozzies, Love the Q&A resource and already found lots of useful stuff too! I just started as an in-house SEO at a retailer and my first main challenge is to tidy up the complex URL structures and remove the ugly sub sitemap approach currently used. I already found a number of suggestions but it looks like I am dealing with a number of challenges that I need to resolve in a single release. So here is the current setup: The website is an ecommerce site (department store) with around 30k products. We are using multi select navigation (non Ajax). The main website uses a third party search engine to power the multi select navigation, that search engine has a very ugly URL structure. For example www.domain.tld/browse?location=1001/brand=100/color=575&size=1&various other params, or for multi select URL’s www.domain.tld/browse?location=1001/brand=100,104,506/color=575&size=1 &various other non used URL params. URL’s are easily up to 200 characters long and non-descriptive at all to our users. Many of these type of URL’s are indexed by search engines (we currently have 1.2 million of those URL’s indexed including session id’s and all other nasty URL params) Next to this the site is using a “sub site” that is sort of optimized for SEO, not 100% sure this is cloaking but it smells like it. It has a simplified navigation structure and better URL structure for products. Layout is similair to our main site but all complex HTMLelements like multi select, large top navigations menu's etc are all removed. Many of these links are indexed by search engines and rank higher than links from our main website. The URL structure is www.domain.tld/1/optimized-url .Currently 64.000 of these URL’s are indexed. We have links to this sub site in the footer of every page but a normal customer would never reach this site unless they come from organic search. Once a user lands on one of these pages we try to push him back to the main site as quickly as possible. My planned approach to improve this: 1.) Tidy up the URL structure in the main website (e.g. www.domain.tld/women/dresses and www.domain.tld/diesel-red-skirt-4563749. I plan to use Solution 2 as described in http://www.seomoz.org/blog/building-faceted-navigation-that-doesnt-suck to block multi select URL’s from being indexed and would like to use the URL param “location” as an indicator for search engines to ignore the link. A risk here is that all my currently indexed URL (1.2 million URL’s) will be blocked immediately after I put this live. I cannot redirect those URL’s to the optimized URL’s as the old URL’s should still be accessible. 2.) Remove the links to the sub site (www.domain.tld/1/optimized-url) from the footer and redirect (301) all those URL’s to the newly created SEO friendly product URL’s. URL’s that cannot be matched since there is no similar catalog location in the main website will be redirected (301) to our homepage. I wonder if this is a correct approach and if it would be better to do this in a phased way rather than the currently planned big bang? Any feedback would be highly appreciated, also let me know if things are not clear. Thanks! Chris
Technical SEO | | eCommerceSEO0 -
Getting a Video Sitemap Indexed
Hi, A client of mine completed a video sitemap to Google Webmaster Tools a couple of months ago. As of yet the videos are still not indexing in Google. All of the videos sit on the one page but have unique URLs in the sitemap. Does anybody know a reason why they are not being indexed? Thanks David
Technical SEO | | RadicalMedia0