Can a page be 100% topically relevant to a search query?
-
Today's YouMoz post, Accidental SEO Tests: When On-Page Optimization Ceases to Matter, explores the theory that there is an on-page optimization saturation point, "beyond which further on-page optimization no longer improves your ability to rank" for the keywords/keyword topics you are targeting. In other words, you can optimize your page for search to the point that it is 100% topically relevant to query and intent.
Do you believe there exists such a thing as a page that is 100% topically relevant? What are your thoughts regarding there being an on-page optimization saturation point, beyond which further on-page optimization no longer improves your ability to rank? Let's discuss!
-
I consider 100% match purely as theoretically possible. In my modest opinion the visitor determines the relevancy of the landingpage. And it is Google's nobel job to serve the visitor with a page that fits his needs. But in this case no page can be fully satisfying to everybody, due to different search intentions with the same keyword.
When you achieve a high conversion on your page you'v probably written a very relevant page. So let the visitor truly find what he is looking for and Google will notice....
-
Well said, Russ, especially for a "mathy" answer.
I am curious, though, would this "ideal document" you describe have a specific word count?
-
Warning, mathy answer follows. This is a generic description of what is going on, not exact, but hopefully understandable.
Yes, there is some theoretical page that is 100% topically relevant if you had a copy of the "ideal document" produced by the topical relevancy model. This would not look like a real page, though. It would look like a jumble of words in ideal relation and distance to one another. However, most topic models are built using sampling and, more importantly, the comparative documents that are used to determine the confidence level that your document's relevancy is non-random is also sampled. This means that there is some MoE (Margin of Error).
As you and your competitors approach 100% topical relevancy, that Margin of Error likely covers the difference. If you are 99.98% relevant, and they are 99.45% relevant, but the MoE is 1%, then a topical relevancy system cant conclude with certainty that you are more relevant than they are.
At this point, the search model would need to rely on other metrics, like authority, over relevance to differentiate the two pages.
-
With the pace at which things are changing and throwing in machine learning in to the ranking factor, I would say it's close to impossible to have 100% topically relevancy for any good period of time.
-
100% saturation is impossible to achieve while maintaining any semblance of value. Not only because any proper page inherently has navigation, internal linkage, and myriad other elements, but because to write content about a subject in that amount of detail, one would invariably need to write about sub-topics and related topics. It's just not feasible. But, and here's the kicker, you wouldn't want 100% saturation anyway.
Rich, dynamic content incorporates that which is related to it. Strong pages link out to others, and keep visitors within their media cycle, if not churning them lower down. Good content is content that holds information that's both detailed and general to a topic. I would say, at most, the highest saturation point that still remains within strong SEO and content optimization is about 85-90% when taking into account all page content - and even that's pushing it, really.
-
I would agree to a point. At its heart, Google probably uses some form of numerical score for a page as it relates to a query. If a page is a perfect match, it scores 100%. I would also suggest that attaining a perfect score is a virtual impossibility.
The scoring system, however, is dynamic. The page may be perfect for a particular query only at a particular point in time.
- Google's algorithm changes daily. What's perfect today may not be perfect tomorrow.
- Semantic search must be dynamic. If Google discovers a new Proof Term or Relevant Term related to the query, and the page in question doesn't contain that term, the page is no longer perfect.
These are only a couple of examples.
For practical purposes, the amount of testing, research, etc. to achieve a perfect score at some point delivers diminishing returns. The amount of effort required to push a page from 95% to 100% isn't worth the effort, especially since Google's algorithm is a secret.
Sometimes good is good enough.
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
-
Will more landing pages with related keywords improve ranking of main keyword?
Hi all, We are in the process of creating new landing pages and noticed something what our competitors been following with landing pages. They have created multiple landing pages targeting the related keywords of a main topic / main keyword. Like "seo defined", "seo history", "seo benefits", "seo strategies", "types of seo", etc being "SEO" as main keyword or main topic. Will this works? Thanks
Algorithm Updates | | vtmoz0 -
Duplicate Content on Product Pages with Canonical Tags
Hi, I'm an SEO Intern for a third party wine delivery company and I'm trying to fix the following issue with the site regarding duplicate content on our product pages: Just to give you a picture of what I'm dealing with, the duplicate product pages that are being flagged have URLs that have different Geo-variations and Product-Key Variations. This is what Moz's Site Crawler is seeing as Duplicate content for the URL www.example.com/wines/dry-red/: www.example.com/wines/dry-red/_/N-g123456 www.example.com/wines/dry-red/_/N-g456789 www.example.com/wines/California/_/N-0 We have loads of product pages with dozens of duplicate content and I'm coming to the conclusion that its the product keys that are confusing google. So we had the web development team put the canonical tag on the pages but still they were being flagged by google. I checked the of the pages and found that all the pages that had 2 canonical tags I understand we should only have one canonical tag in the so I wanted to know if I could just easily remove the second canonical tag and will it solve the duplicate content issue we're currently having? Any suggestions? Thanks -Drew
Algorithm Updates | | drewstorys0 -
Do we need to maintain consistency in page titles suffix?
Hi all, We usually give "brand & primary keyword" across all pages in website like "vertigo tiles". Do we need to maintain this suffix across all page titles? What if we change according to the page? Will Google downlook for not maintaining these page titles suffix like I mentioned? Thanks
Algorithm Updates | | vtmoz0 -
People also searched for
Hi There, I am promoting an online events website and would like to know adding long tail keywords (4-6 words unique queries) under "People also searched for:" is a good or bad idea on event pages? My intention is not to stuff page with keywords, although I want to let search engine bot know that particular page is relevant for other mentioned queries as well. So Intent is to sent relevancy signal (via content). So the heading "People also searched for" could be changed to something like: Related searches Searches related to Related queries etc. Thanks
Algorithm Updates | | jamesinhere
James0 -
What's the correct format when you Disavow a single page? with or without www.?
Hi Y'all. Can't seem to find an article on disavowing a single page. Do i use A, B, or submit both A and B? Example: A. http://disavowexample.com B. http://www.disavowexample.com Which one does Google prefer? I know for some I just find the canonical url of the page (which show www,) but wanted your expert advice! Thanks
Algorithm Updates | | Shawn1240 -
Canonical Tag on All Pages
This is a new one for me. I have a client that has a canonical tag on almost every page of their site. Even on pages that don't need it. For example on http://www.client.com/examplex they had code: Maybe I have missed something, but is there a reason for this? Does this hurt the ranking of the page?
Algorithm Updates | | smulto0 -
Search history Effects on SERPS
With search engines using adaptive search in their algo, what's the best way to reset? Currently I go to my browser which primarily is Safari second Firefox third Chrome, I empty the cache, clear history and remove all cookies and data. I also disable customerzation based on search history. Is this the best way of starting from scratch so my search results won't incorporate adaptive search tech? I also make sure I'm not signed into my gmail account since that can impact SERPS as well. What else should I be doing to make sure my search is not customized?
Algorithm Updates | | bronxpad1 -
How often do people use Google Product Search
I was was reading Tom Critchlow's excellent blog on how to rank well for Google Product Search. I'm trying to find out if there are stats on how often people use this feature in Google (since it is not listed on Google's main navigation). I'm working with a customer who has b-2-b products and am trying to determine the value of adjusting his ecommerce pages to appear on Google Product Search.
Algorithm Updates | | EricVallee340