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.
Link flow for multiple links to same URL
-
Hi there,
my question is as follows:How does Google handle link flow if two links in a given page point to the same URL? (do they flow link individually or not?)
This seems to be a newbie question, but actually it seems that there is little evidence and even also little consensus in the SEO community about this detail.
- Answers should include source
- Information about the current state of art at Google is preferable
- The question is not about anchor text, general best practises for linking, "PageRank is dead" etc.
We do know that the "historical" PageRank was implemented (a long time ago) without special handling for multiple links, as e.g. last stated by Matt Cutts in this video: http://searchengineland.com/googles-matt-cutts-one-page-two-links-page-counted-first-link-192718
On the other hand, many people from the SEO community say that only the first link counts. But so far I could not find any data to back this up, which is quite surprising.
-
I totally agree on the focus thing in general - it's not helpful to act with PageRank in mind when it comes to layout decisions etc.
But: For large websites (e.g. 100,000 pages and up) crawl rate, indexing and rankings of deeper parts of the site depend heavily on the internal link graph. Taking a deeper look at the internal link graph gives us a lot of useful information in these cases, does it?
Now: Think of links sitting in a template that gets used on 50,000 pages. A little change here is likely to cause quite a difference in the internal link graph.
For example I've run PageRank simulations with both models on a smaller website with only 1,500 pages / 100,000 links. For many pages, the little difference ends up with 20-30% more or less internal PageRank - for these individual pages, this could be crucial for crawling, indexation and rankings. Still not useful?
Since moz runs it's own iterative PR like algorithms: How do you guys handle this with mozRank / mozTrust? Which model leads to better correlations with rankings?
-
- The links both get PageRank flow...
- The link value gets divided, though, so it wouldn't exactly double the value.
- The link extraction process might choose to only select one link from the page based on certain factors (perhaps ignoring some links not because they are duplicative but based on location, or other qualifiers)
Here is Matt Cutts talking about this very issue. And here again. It is the closest thing we have to an answer.
I think the reason for the "first link counts" is really an extension of an understanding of PageRank. Let's say a page has 1 outbound link. It gets 100% of the value passable by that page. Now, let's say the page adds another link, but it is the exact same link. Now, each link gets 50%. The sum total is 100%. It is as if the 2nd link were never added. But, this calculation changes depending on the other links on the page. Let's say a page has 2 links on it. One to you, one to someone else. 50/50. If you get another, you jump to 67/33. Slightly better. As the page increases in number of links, your additional link approaches a doubling of the first link's value. So on one end of the spectrum it is valueless. On the other end of the spectrum it doubles.
The other question is whether anchor text is counted for all links. Some experimentation indicates that only the 1st anchor text matters. This might also indicate the selection / extraction process mentioned in #2.
That all being said, I think I agree with Matt Cutts on this one. This is such a small issue that you really should focus on bigger picture stuff. It is interesting, yes, but not particularly useful.
I hope that helps!
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
-
Virtual URL Google not indexing?
Dear all, We have two URLs: The main URL which is crawled both by GSC and where Moz assigns our keywords is: https://andipaeditions.com/banksy/ The second one is called a virtual url by our developpers: https://andipaeditions.com/banksy/signedandunsignedprintsforsale/ This is currently not indexed by Google. We have been linking to the second URL and I am unable to see if this is passing juice/anything on to the main one /banksy/ Is it a canonical? The /banksy/ is the one that is being picked up in serps/by Moz and worry that the two similar URLs are splitting the signal. Should I redirect from the second to the first? Thank you
On-Page Optimization | | TAT1000 -
Canonicalising a product with multiple variants
I am working with an ecommerce site and have encountered an issue I haven't come across before and would appreciate some advice on how to proceed. There are multiple variation products with one master product and then up to 20 or 30 variant products, the variation could be colour, size or both. The site has been set up to canonicalise all the variations to the master variant product, which I understand to be best practice. But, this is where the issue occurs, the master variant product URL 302 redirects to one of the variant product URLs. Example below. My question is, is this harmful to our SEO efforts? Would be be best to canonicalise to a preferred colour or size variation? EXAMPLE: Master variant product: www.example.co.uk/primary-category/product-123 Seeing this product on the page and clicking will 302 redirect to www.example/co.uk/primiary-category/product-123/colour-456 On page www.example/co.uk/primiary-category/product-123/colour-456 the canonical tag is www.example.co.uk/primary-category/product-123 Any help with this would be greatly appreciated.
On-Page Optimization | | SimonKenworthy0 -
Should I use an acronym in my URL?
I know that Google understands various acronyms. Example: If I search for CRM System, it knows i'm searching for a customer relationship management system. However, will it recognize less known acronyms? I have a page geared specifically for SAP data archiving for human capital management systems. For those in the industry, they simply call it HCM. Here is how I view my options: Option #1: www.mywebsite.com/sap-data-archiving/human-capital-management Option #2: www.mywebsite.com/sap-data-archiving/hcm Option #3: www.mywebsite.com/sap-data-archiving/hcm-human-capital-management With option #3, i'm capturing the acronym AND the full phrase. This doesn't make my URL overly long either. Of course, in my content i'll reference both. What does everyone else think about the URL? -Alex
On-Page Optimization | | MeasureEverything0 -
URL Path. What is better for SEO
Hello Moz people, Is it better for SEO to have a URL path like this: flowersite.com/anniversary_flowers/dozen_roses OR flowersite.com/dozen_roses Is it better to have the full trail of pages in the URL?
On-Page Optimization | | CKerr0 -
Handling multiple locations in the footer
I have a client with several locations. Should I include only the main office's address in the footer? The client is wanting to add them all.
On-Page Optimization | | SearchParty0 -
How to Structure URL's for Multiple Locations
We are currently undergoing a site redesign and are trying to figure out the best way to structure the URL's and breadcrumbs for our many locations. We currently have 60 locations nationwide and our URL structure is as follows: www.mydomain.com/locations/{location} Where {location} is the specific street the location is on or the neighborhood the location is in. (i.e. www.mydomain.com/locations/waterford-lakes) The issue is, {location} is usually too specific and is not a broad enough keyword. The location "Waterford-Lakes" is in Orlando and "Orlando" is the important keyword, not " Waterford Lakes". To address this, we want to introduce state and city pages. Each state and city page would link to each location within that state or city (i.e. an Orlando page with links to "Waterford Lakes", "Lake Nona", "South Orlando", etc.). The question is how to structure this. Option 1 Use the our existing URL and breadcrumb structure (www.mydomain.com/locations/{location}) and add state and city pages outside the URL path: www.mydomain.com/{area} www.mydomain.com/{state} Option 2 Build the city and state pages into the URL and breadcrumb path: www.mydomain.com/locations/{state}/{area}/{location} (i.e www.mydomain.com/locations/fl/orlando/waterford-lakes) Any insight is much appreciated. Thanks!
On-Page Optimization | | uBreakiFix0 -
Best way to nofollow affiliate links?
I don't "nofollow" affiliate links but I have quite a few. Doing them one by one would just be an impossible job. Would it be best to get a plugin that nofollows EVERYTHING? What would google prefer? I need to DOFOLLOW some links because those sites deserve it.
On-Page Optimization | | 2bloggers0 -
How do I PERMANENTLY change an incorrect URL link with one of my keywords?
Hello, I received an “F” grade on my on-page report for one of my keywords. I noticed that the URL linked with that keyword was wrong. After changing it to the correct URL, I received an “A.” However, the change was not permanent. How do I permanently change the URL? I don’t see any “Save Changes” or “Apply Changes” button anywhere. Thank you!
On-Page Optimization | | jampaper0