Moz Q&A is closed.
After more than 13 years, and tens of thousands of questions, Moz Q&A closed on 12th December 2024. Whilst we’re not completely removing the content - many posts will still be possible to view - we have locked both new posts and new replies. More details here.
Splitting Page Authority with two URLs for the same page.
-
Hello guys,
My website is currently holding two different URLs for the same page and I am under the impression such set up is dividing my Page Authority and Link Juice.
We currently have the following page with both URLs below:
www.wbresearch.com/soldiertechnologyusa/home.aspx
www.wbresearch.com/soldiertechnologyusa/Analysing the page authority and backlinks I identified that we are splitting the amount of backlinks (links from sites, social media and therefore authority).
"/home.aspx"
PA: 67
Linking Root Domains: 52
Total Links: 272"/"
PA: 64
Linking Root Domains: 29
Total Links: 128I am under the impression that if the URLs were the same we would maximise our backlinks and therefore page authority.
My Question: How can I fix this? Should I have a 301 redirect from the page "/" to the "/home.aspx" therefore passing the authority and link juice of “/” directly to “/homes.aspx”?
Trying to gather thoughts and ideas on this, suggestions are much appreciated?
Thanks!
-
Great help.
Thanks both!
-
Hi Joao, yes a 301 redirect would be preferable to a canonical. A 301 is more "absolute" - it lets search engines know that they should ignore the redirected page. A canonical is more like a piece of advice for search engines.
Canonicals are useful if you don't have the development skills or resources to implement a 301, and they can also be used when it's not practical to add a 301 to lots of web pages.
In short - use a 301 if practical

-
I think it generally depends on the cause of the duplicate. If its system issue then you'll forever be creating 301s for your urls. In that case its best to avoid having to do the 301 and stick with canonical. With canonical are telling the search engine to only index one version of the url.
Both 301 and canonical have their uses but the choice should depend on the issue and what you are trying to achieve. Hope this helps?
Duke
-
Hi Duke and Alice,
Thank you for your both replies. Very helpful.
We currently do a rel="canonical" from the page "/" to the "/home.aspx", which should avoid the content duplication issue.
I have seen mix opinions on where to use rel="canonical" vs 301 redirect. Just found a Matt Cutts' video about that (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zW5UL3lzBOA)
Alice - I take that it might be better to do a 301 redirect than a rel="canonical", as per the video. What do think? should I leave the rel-canonical or try to move to a 301?
Cheers guys!
-
Hi Joao, some good advice from Duke here. A 301 redirect will solve this duplicate problem and help to consolidate the authority. However it's worth investigating to see what caused the problem and whether it is a wider issue, in which case canonicals might be more appropriate. Good luck!
-
Hi Joao,
I think you probably need to establish if the those two urls came about due to a cms or system issue. I ask this because some cms system create duplicate/different urls for the same page and the good ones have a canonical set up to avoid duplicate content. If it is a system or cms issue then get a canonical set up. Use screeming frog to run a crawl to see if i picks up any duplicate urls. Currently, your homepage runs the risk of duplicate content penalty.
If its not a system wide issue, then set up a 301 redirect. Think of the home page that people will remember easily and can share on social media platforms without part of it being cut of due to length.
All the best
Duke
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 happens when you replace a page with a new version that has the same URL?
a new page template was created the plan is to publish the new page (which has the same URL as before) to web and delete the old page that has the URL , will that have an SEO implications ?
Technical SEO | | lina_digital1 -
Indexed pages
Just started a site audit and trying to determine the number of pages on a client site and whether there are more pages being indexed than actually exist. I've used four tools and got four very different answers... Google Search Console: 237 indexed pages Google search using site command: 468 results MOZ site crawl: 1013 unique URLs Screaming Frog: 183 page titles, 187 URIs (note this is a free licence, but should cut off at 500) Can anyone shed any light on why they differ so much? And where lies the truth?
Technical SEO | | muzzmoz1 -
Home Page Ranking Instead of Service Pages
Hi everyone! I've noticed that many of our clients have pages addressing specific queries related to specific services on their websites, but that the Home Page is increasingly showing as the "ranking" page. For example, a plastic surgeon we work with has a page specifically talking about his breast augmentation procedure for Miami, FL but instead of THAT page showing in the search results, Google is using his home page. Noticing this across the board. Any insights? Should we still be optimizing these specific service pages? Should I be spending time trying to make sure Google ranks the page specifically addressing that query because it SHOULD perform better? Thanks for the help. Confused SEO :/, Ricky Shockley
Technical SEO | | RickyShockley0 -
Are image pages considered 'thin' content pages?
I am currently doing a site audit. The total number of pages on the website are around 400... 187 of them are image pages and coming up as 'zero' word count in Screaming Frog report. I needed to know if they will be considered 'thin' content by search engines? Should I include them as an issue? An answer would be most appreciated.
Technical SEO | | MTalhaImtiaz0 -
Product Pages Outranking Category Pages
Hi, We are noticing an issue where some product pages are outranking our relevant category pages for certain keywords. For a made up example, a "heavy duty widgets" product page might rank for the keyword phrase Heavy Duty Widgets, instead of our Heavy Duty Widgets category page appearing in the SERPs. We've noticed this happening primarily in cases where the name of the product page contains an at least partial match for the desired keyword phrase we want the category page to rank for. However, we've also found isolated cases where the specified keyword points to a completely irrelevent pages instead of the relevant category page. Has anyone encountered a similar issue before, or have any ideas as to what may cause this to happen? Let me know if more clarification of the question is needed. Thanks!
Technical SEO | | ShawnHerrick0 -
Old URL redirect to New URL
Alright I did something dumb a year a go and I'm still paying for it. I changed my hyphenated URL to the non-hyphenated version when I redesigned my website. I say it was dumb because I lost most of my link juice even though I did 301 redirects (via the htaccess file) for almost all of the pages I could find in Google's index. Here's my problem. My new site took a huge hit in traffic (down 60%) when I made the change and even though I've done thousands of redirects my old site is still showing up in the SERPS and send much if not most of my traffic. I don't want to take the old site down in fear it will kill all of my traffic. What should I do? Is there a better method I should explore then 301 redirects? Could the other site be affecting my current rank since it's still there? (FYI...both sites are built on the WP platform). Any help or ideas are greatly appreciated. Thank you! Joe
Technical SEO | | kaje0 -
Trailing Slashes In Url use Canonical Url or 301 Redirect?
I was thinking of using 301 redirects for trailing slahes to no trailing slashes for my urls. EG: www.url.com/page1/ 301 redirect to www.url.com/page1 Already got a redirect for non-www to www already. Just wondering in my case would it be best to continue using htacces for the trailing slash redirect or just go with Canonical URLs?
Technical SEO | | upick-1623910