Ranking better with worse figures
-
Six months ago a competitor e-commerce site appeared in the top 10. Now six months later he is at #2. (for the main keyword in my sector in Dutch language, competition +4 million)
My site is 4 years old and since three years ranks at #1 or 2. I'm now at #3, behind the competitors site.
My competitor has a HomePage PA of 36 with 2295 links from 26 domains, root domain DA 23 with 175000 links from 30 domains.
My site has a HomePage PA of 49 with 6975 links froms 238 domains, root domain DA 40 with 310023 links from 269 domains.
I have more specific landing pages, better and more content, code W3C checked ....
Can somebody explain why a younger site with worse figures gets a better position in Google ranking?
-
Thanks Marek for the usefull words. Yes I still use meta-keywords as there is also Bing and Yahoo. But of course you are right about differing the description tags. I will change them asap.
Actually all this is about the Dutch version where I have "only" +4.000.000 competition for the keyword Lighting in Dutch. I don't even want to try to compete in English with that word. But then I compete with the Brand names
and get my English speaking customers anyway.
Thanks again !
-
Sometimes it is been hard to understand but never give up
you still using meta-keywords ... they can only help the competition not google position.
meta - description tags are all the same for different pages.
If yes it can be a main reason. You have to diversify descriptions and they have to be consistent with title and page content.
e.g. for <title></span></span><span style="color: #5e5e5e; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif;"><span><span> </span>Buy LED lighting at the best price.</span></span><span style="color: #5e5e5e; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif;"><span></title>
in description use: name="Description" content="LED lighting is the latest craze. ..... an so on about LED up to 140 characters">
Marek
-
H-tags, titles,speed, and much more, I am very aware of the importance and using. What worries me more than being dropped on #3 is that a site, appearing from nowhere, in 6 months can get to the top. This site is in all ways inferior to mine, I mean inferior in terms of what google thinks is important. Their content is fresher of course and they have less nearly dupicate content. But it seems to me that history has no weight anymore. It seems that once you are ther for three years, you are damn dificult to be caught. Seems I am wrong.
For my understanding, analysing the results for years, sooner or later the mechanism, the algorithm behind (from Google) must become clear. Thousands of people are on top and after making an inventory of everything possible that can be important, I don't discover new things anymore. It seems that they have some secret arguments left as, as you told yourself, in many cases the logic based on what is known is far far away.
And no, their domain is as bad as mine
I started my site without knowing that a keyword in a domain name is important.
What I see is that in the top 10 there are 9 .be domains and only mine is a .com. Maybe Googles starts to give importance at local domains.
And no again, I don't have many G+1, but they don't neither. I have many pages on Facebook, a page on LinkedIn, a blog with my Google identity, an author link on my site pointing to this identity .... I'm getting out of arguments !
-
Maybe, I never got attention for PA and DA. Only after starting to use SEOmoz that I became aware. But my links are good, are many, my content and keywords optimal, my code good, my speed fast. I have some nearly duplicate content as I have 27000 products on my site and the difference between product A and B can be very small giving nearly identical product pages. But this was as such since the beginning. Maybe Google has more attention for this now than some years ago.
-
Thanks for your answer. No, I am quiet sure that my platform is the best what I can get in my country. I was aware that a platform can be important for ranking as speed is important for google.
-
I have many examples of such a situation. In my work I won with Nikon Academy (akademianikona.pl) - site supported by Nikon with huge number of links and better statistics.
Refresh you content.
I agree with EGOL and Gordon. What I want to add ... think that internal consistency of the site is very important. Good content structure (H -tags, content with keywords) - title - description - url should be the first elements of the subjects of your mind.
Also very important is competitors tracking. What do they have that you do not have? Maybe they follow some (local ... global) trends? Social impact is another area to check - do you have many G+1, FB shares, votes etc...
Check technical issues like page load speed and other
And last but not least - what is their domain name - is it better that yours?
some other ideas to improvement (simple report) link
Good luck Rik
-
Just a hypothesis here, it could be based on the platform you are using. Some ecommerce platforms rank better in google, an example of this is that the ecommerce platform "magento" is seo friendlier than other ecommerce platforms. That could be a reason that it is ranking better with "worse" statistics.
Another hypothesis is that their onsite is better with less errors and less duplicate content and therefore being penalized less.
Hope that Helps
-
I can only echo EGOL.
Keep working at quality content, relevant links etc. if your efforts continue, there is every chance you will be back on top.
-
Can somebody explain why a younger site with worse figures gets a better position in Google ranking?
Maybe because the figures that you are looking at are different from what google is using to rank the pages. I think that the figures that you are looking at are good for tracking your progress over time but they obviously are not what google is using.
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
-
Best way to find the highest ranking pages for a message board?
What is the best tool or method to find the highest ranking posts and content on a message board or forum? What is the best tool or method for finding the highest ranking keywords for a message board or forum?
Competitive Research | | Hondaspeder0 -
Ranking for Competitive Keywords vs. Less Competitive Keyword Variations
I'm curious about situations where a website ranks very well for query variations, but doesn't rank for the query itself (or the reverse of that). For Redfin (where I work), here is the situation with regard to keyword rankings on Google (searched today from USA, incognito)... real estate search - #4 real estate online - #4 real estate site - #5 find real estate - #9 get real estate - #16 real estate - #163 It stands to reason that a site ranking well for a competitive query should also rank well for less competitive query variations - especially query variations that are non-limiting and do not demand a custom landing page (for example, I would consider 'board games' to dramatically limit the query 'games' and be best targeted with a targeted page...not so with 'real estate site' and 'real estate'). So, my question is, what are some theories regarding situations like this? Why do some sites rank so well for competitive queries but not for non-limiting query variations? Why aren't the sites that are crushing us for 'real estate' also crushing us for 'real estate' variations (to be clear...the top sites are crushing us for both)? Is it anchor text? Is it social signals? Is it offline signals, co-occurrence, or citations? What about internal linking and site structure? I realize it's likely a mix of all this, but I'm hoping we can drum up some new ideas here. FYI, on Bing we also rank very well for 'real estate' variations, but leap up to 31st for 'real estate'. Thoughts?
Competitive Research | | RyanOD0 -
Using Semantic Language to rank, how much stock do you put into this? (LSI)
In theory, analyzing the top results for a given phrase and comparing the common words and phrases would indicate what google considers relative language to the query. Latent Semantic Indexing (LSI) was and still is a buzz phrase for some SEOs. But how much stock do you give to the idea that if you can determine the common language for top rankers and then duplicate that language and density of common words that your website will then rank for that query you desire? Has anyone here tested the theory of using semantic language from the results themselves to better rank?
Competitive Research | | Thos0030 -
Blogging just to manipulate rankings?
Hi, I have been playing with Open Site Explorer for a while and have been trying to figure out how some of our competitors could rank with "not so great" articles. I don't want to sound harsh here but some of the articles outranking us are nothing but 6 images + 200-225 words from a press release and a Video. How exactly does Google justify this by ranking them higher than a 1500 word unique article that has been written in no less than 7 days? According to OpenSite Explorer, about the two pages compared, the difference is the number of LINKS. The sad part is, without 1 exception, all their links are coming from blog pages like *.wordpress.com *.typepad.com etc. I would have been just FINE if their links were NATURAL. You may ask me why I assume those blogs are created by them. Because every single post on those blogs are pointing to their domain... I don't think a normal blogger would keep pointing to the same domain. So what are we supposed to do here? Wait 3 months so people discover our articles and natural links will come? (It happens sometimes but then it may not...) Do what they do? Sorry about the ranting but I have one question if you don't want to read the rant. Is blogging to build links, considered black hat or not?
Competitive Research | | Gamer070 -
Why do you think this site can't reach a better ranking?
Hello, My name is Pablo Lagos. We have a hosting company in Chile since 2006. All the time we have been ranked in the first page for the keyword "hosting" in google.cl. Some years ago, we used to be on the first 3 results. Since the last year our site went down to 7 and higher places no matter we do. When I run the link analysis, we have the highest punctuation in all items. I would really appreciate your comments. The site is in spanish: www.ilihost.cl Thanks.
Competitive Research | | pabloandres0 -
Twitter as a website's #2 ranked linked page?
A site I'm researching on open-site explorer has a #2 link with page authority of 52 and Domain authority of 97, and that link is the site's twitter page. No other sites I've researched have had their twitter page show up in it's link rankings like this, can someone explain?
Competitive Research | | TheSquareFoot0 -
How many Page Rank 8 sites are there?
Anyone have any estimate of how many Page Rank 8 sites are out there? Best, Steve
Competitive Research | | Aggie0 -
Whats the best way to see why your competitor is out ranking you?
I am trying to rank in the number on position for Part Time CFO. Currently we are in 2nd and 3rd. We have way more quality inbound links then the site in first position, more content etc. How would you go about investigating why they are ahead of us?
Competitive Research | | b2bcfo0