Anyone else noticing that Bing & Yahoo are delivering widely different results
-
Anyone else noticing that Bing & Yahoo are delivering widely different results in past week. Prior to that after they started using Bing SE it seemed like they were identical, but no more. I am using RankTracker and getting this on several web sites.
-
I know rank tracker, but you should have your settings such that they don't count you as being 'logged in' to any service. With Google's SPYW and other social integration bits and pieces, the only steady rankings are the logged-out ones.
Being 'logged into facebook' on its own shouldn't mess your rankings even with Rank Tracker.
-
I may have missed the obvious here with this one. The results were widely different, not even close. The difference may be that I was logged into Facebook when I ran the software by Link Assistant called Rank Tracker. That skews results if you have liked the site.
-
Ever since the Bing-Yahoo allegiance struck up I've been looking at this question- for some of our past and present clients, the results are similar but others do seem to be very different, which is strange if they're sharing the same information and algorithms.
I've tried it logged in and logged out of Bing/Yahoo and can still get variances.
Have to say, I'm not sure why that's happening - but you're definitely not alone in this experience!
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
-
How much do branded search organic traffic & direct traffic impact the ranking for their non-branded topic/keyword?
Hi Moz community, We can see many websites with a reputation will have more number of visitors landing with these two types of traffic mostly (>90%): organic traffic of brand queries and direct traffic. Will these visits help and impact the ranking of these websites for the keywords/topics they been employing? Ex: Moz will have many such visitors. Will this really impact the ranking of Moz for non-brand queries they try to rank for, like "SEO Software". If so, will this have a huge impact or it's just a minor ranking factor. Because we have this with our website and we don't see such boost in rankings compared to our competitors with less direct traffic; where as I been looking at some SEO articles that direct traffic is one of the most important ranking factors. Thanks
Algorithm Updates | | vtmoz0 -
Why are organic search results vastly different on Bing, Google and Yahoo Search
We searched two words for a client so see how/where their site returned results. Depending on both the browser we used and the search engine, the results were so vastly different we were shocked. The site returned #2 or 3 on Bing and YahooSearch and not until the 3rd page for Google! And it also returned much worse on Chrome than any other browser, a Google product. I know this topic must be covered somewhere, or perhaps someone would be kind enough to chime in and shed some light? We have been working hard to optimize for Google and failing, but doing very well everywhere else. What gives?
Algorithm Updates | | jimmyzig1 -
Who else is noticing a shift in deeper pages ranking?
Without mentioning names, we're noticing a shift in many of our clients ranking pages. Previously many of them held page 1 positions with their home page. We've been building brand only anchor text to these pages for some time now and there's a noticeable change in visibility to the domain as a whole displayed in GWT and there's an uplift in organic traffic too. It just happens that some of our clients already had pages in the root directory that were very optimised for the clients' head terms, but all of a sudden, these sub pages with very few inbound links have started ranking in the place of the home pages. I've attached a screenshot of the landing page organic traffic. The pages in question have been there for at least 8-10 months. These inner pages would not normally have been able to hold their ground in this position and I'm concerned that this is a temporary change. I can see this going one of two ways; (i) home page beings to out rank sub page as before, (i) sub page loses ranking ability and home page rank does not come back. My questions to the community are therefore; **Has anyone else noticed this shift in ranking behaviour? ** What are everyone's thoughts on this? - Will it remain this way? From this query I can easily ask another wider question; Good advice across the internet says we should be building strong brand links and citations to our clients' domains. Typically brand links go to the homepage, which should provide the homepage and (to a lesser extent the domain) with a ranking/traffic/visibility uplift. However, as I'm noticing other pages now picking up ranking boosts as a result of this; **Should we still be trying to gain links to these more commercial landing pages? ** How are others building high quality links to pages full of commercial copy? I hope this can spark a little bit of a debate. I look forward to hearing everyone's thoughts. Thanks yPOEjVA.png
Algorithm Updates | | tomcraig860 -
Any results appearing state side from the roll out of in-depth articles?
I've noticed today that Google are not serving my author profile up in the SERPs, last night it was fine but today they've all gone. Could this be due to the release of in-depth articles? Has anyone else who is using rel author/publisher seen their profiles disappear. My pages are still in the same rank position but the information has been reverted to a previous state. I'm in the UK and unsure what determines a Google roll-out in terms of time scale, so I wanted to see if in-depth articles are starting to make their mark in the SERPs in the USA or Canada. Thanks for any input on this question. UPDATE BELOW ** I've decided to update this question with my own possible answer just in case it is helpful to any one. I see today that my Author/Publisher profile have now come back to my pages in SERPs, which I'm happy to see. I am an avid user of creating annotations in GA for each activity/change I make on my sites. The other day I wanted to test the impact on changing my profile pic to my company's logo identity - so I recorded this in GA as a date point of reference. My pic was changed to the logo and voila it started to appear in search. Why did I do this? Well our logo is a kind of high viz green box and pretty well stands out amongst the 10 blue lines and sponsored ads. I wanted to see if this would attract people's attention - should we not experiment??. For a time it worked but as you will see from my question my profile was essentially removed. Does Google watch out for this? It does not, for instance, serve our logo/profile for web pages where the author and the publisher are the same, meaning the company is the author and the publisher. I can see that Google are requesting that for in-depth articles they would like you to use the schema mark-up for organizational logos for your articles - http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.co.uk/2013/05/using-schemaorg-markup-for-organization.html. You will see in this posting quite a lot of discussion on logo size, code location, optimal settings etc. There seems to be a hint that the logo size should be around 50k and 230x230px. So maybe this is the route we need to take in order for your brand's identity to be served with your content. I'll be trying this out on some of my content and wait and see. If anyone else is working on thism trying out new ways to serve their content using schema mark-up it would be great to hear from you. Best David David
Algorithm Updates | | David-E-Carey0 -
Local SEO NAP - Two Different Cities....Same Zip Code
I've come across this recently and wanted to get your thoughts. I personally live in a city called Greenacres (yes, it's the place to be) but my zip code is also for Lake Worth. I'm a local SEO company so doing Local SEO stuff is pretty pointless (Google changed that in 2010) but I am sure other people have this issue for their business. Question, What do you do when your zip code is for two different cities. Do you try to make all NAPs (Name Address Phone Numbers) the same city. What if you cant'? Does having the NAP show up different cities hurt your efforts? etc. Obviously I think you'd try to keep the NAP as consistent as possible but what do you do if the citation source changes it or only uses the major of the two cities? There isn't a right or wrong answer (or maybe there is) but I wanted to get some thoughts on it. Darin.
Algorithm Updates | | DarinPirkey0 -
Meta description & Meta keywords
Good morning, One of our HTML experts, just told me that Google is not reading meta keywords or meta description - and they (or one of them) are no longer part of my website SEO ranking Do you know where can i read about it? Are other SE do look at these parameters? Thank you SEOWiseUs
Algorithm Updates | | iivgi1 -
Good results in Web Search, getting worse in Mobile Search
We are redirecting mobile visotors from http://www.1website.com to http://m.2website.com. 1website position in web SERPS is always the same. But mobile search brings less visitors now, 1website is loosing positions there. I know keywords volume is increasing. What could be the reason? (m.2website mobile version is high quality and have very good bounce, pageviews, time on site)
Algorithm Updates | | bele0 -
Local SEO url format & structure: ".com/albany-tummy-tuck" vs ".com/tummy-tuck" vs ".com/procedures/tummy-tuck-albany-ny" etc."
We have a relatively new site (re: August '10) for a plastic surgeon who opened his own solo practice after 25+ years with a large group. Our current url structure goes 3 folders deep to arrive at our tummy tuck procedure landing page. The site architecture is solid and each plastic surgery procedure page (e.g. rhinoplasty, liposuction, facelift, etc.) is no more than a couple clicks away. So far, so good - but given all that is known about local seo (which is a very different beast than national seo) quite a bit of on-page/architecture work can still be done to further improve our local rank. So here a a couple big questions facing us at present: First, regarding format, is it a given that using geo keywords within the url indispustibly and dramatically impacts a site's local rank for the better (e.g. the #2 result for "tummy tuck" and its SHENANIGANS level use of "NYC", "Manhattan", "newyorkcity" etc.)? Assuming that it is, would we be better off updating our cosmetic procedure landing page urls to "/albany-tummy-tuck" or "/albany-ny-tummy-tuck" or "/tummy-tuck-albany" etc.? Second, regarding structure, would we be better off locating every procedure page within the root directory (re: "/rhinoplasty-albany-ny/") or within each procedure's proper parent category (re: "/facial-rejuvenation/rhinoplasty-albany-ny/")? From what I've read within the SEOmoz Q&A, adding that parent category (e.g. "/breast-enhancement/breast-lift") is better than having every link in the root (i.e. completely flat). Third, how long before google updates their algorithm so that geo-optimized urls like http://www.kolkermd.com/newyorkplasticsurgeon/tummytucknewyorkcity.htm don't beat other sites who do not optimize so aggressively or local? Fourth, assuming that each cosmetic procedure page will eventually have strong link profiles (via diligent, long term link building efforts), is it possible that geo-targeted urls will negatively impact our ability to rank for regional or less geo-specific searches? Thanks!
Algorithm Updates | | WDeLuca0