Download - 2014 Google Ranking Factor by Moz
-
Google Ranking Factors: Correlations,
Testing, & Hypotheses
-
What does it mean? How should
we apply the data?
Correlation
-
Correlation does NOT
say why these results
rank higher than these
results
More on
http://moz.com/rand/what-do-correlation-metrics-really-tell-us-about-search-rankings/ -
Correlation tells us what
features, on average, the
results that rank higher have
which the lower ranking results
do not have.
More on
http://moz.com/rand/what-do-correlation-metrics-really-tell-us-about-search-rankings/ -
Correlation tells us what
features, on average, the
results that rank higher have
which the lower ranking results
do not have.
More on
actually using to rank the results!
http://moz.com/rand/what-do-correlation-metrics-really-tell-us-about-search-rankings/ -
Via 2013 Search Ranking Factors
http://moz.com/search-ranking-factors -
Via 2013 Search Ranking Factors
To me, this says individual pages still
hosting domain.
http://moz.com/search-ranking-factors -
Via 2013 Search Ranking Factors
MozRank used to be higher, and so did
getting more complex.
http://moz.com/search-ranking-factors -
Via 2013 Search Ranking Factors
$100 says that if we could get more comprehensive
brand mention data, this correlation would start to
look a lot like links
http://moz.com/search-ranking-factors -
Good discussion about Google+ correlations in this post
Google+ is just too damn high.
http://moz.com/blog/google-plus-correlations -
Good discussion about Google+ correlations in this post
Google:
the blog post the idea that more Google +1s led to higher web ranking. I
http://moz.com/blog/google-plus-correlations -
Good discussion about Google+ correlations in this post
from Google+ (directly or indirectly) at all in our ranking algorithms.
be very surprised if they said that.
http://moz.com/blog/google-plus-correlations -
Good discussion about Google+ correlations in this post
That said, all of the correlations with social are high. That tells me the things
that make content have success on social probably have a lot of overlap
with what makes content successful in Google.
http://moz.com/blog/google-plus-correlations -
Good discussion about Google+ correlations in this post
Domain name keyword matching continues to show decline.
http://moz.com/blog/google-plus-correlations -
Via Mozcast
PMD was as high as 5%
two years ago. EMD was
almost 6%. Both have
fallen precipitously.
http://mozcast.com/metrics -
Basic introduction to LDA and topic-modeling systems here.
We were able to build a better keyword-modeling system in 2013, and
correlations were higher than in past studies looking at raw keyword
repetition or use in title elements.
http://moz.com/blog/lda-and-googles-rankings-well-correlatedhttp://moz.com/blog/lda-and-googles-rankings-well-correlatedhttp://moz.com/blog/lda-and-googles-rankings-well-correlated -
More on rankings and page load time here.
relatively big indirect factor (i.e. users like fast-loading pages, and people
link to/share what they like)
http://moz.com/blog/how-website-speed-actually-impacts-search-ranking -
See How Unique Does Content Need to Be.
Last, more content still seems to, on average, slightly overperform vs. less
http://moz.com/blog/how-unique-does-content-need-to-be-to-perform-well-in-search-engines-whiteboard-friday -
I hope to see many, many more correlation tests
and more things considered! Causal or not,
correlation data is incredibly useful.
-
What can we learn from a recent
SEO test?
Testing
-
Hypothesis:
It seems like Google is starting to ignore or
discount anchor text in links.
-
Here were the test conditions:
#1: Three-word keyword phrase in Google.com US
#3: We pointed links with NO query-matching anchor text from
20 unique, not-particularly-on-topic, high DA domains at result
A and EXACT-anchor-text match links from the same pages at
result A.
#2: At start of test, result A ranked #20, B ranked #13.
-
After 3 Weeks:
All of the links had been indexed by Google
Result B (with exact-match anchor text) ranked #9 in
Google.com US
Result A (with non-query-matching anchor text) ranked
#18 in Google.com US
-
Of Additional Interest:
Result B (with exact-match anchor text) ranked #4 in
Google.co.uk
Result A (with non-query-matching anchor text) ranked
#19 in Google.co.uk
~5 of the 20 linking domains were from UK sites
-
Takeaways:
#1) Anchor text still matters
#2) Geographic location of links matters
-
world. Even imperfect tests are fascinating and
useful, IMO.
-
Three guesses Rand has about
Hypotheses
-
Hypothesis #1
connected to their entities and brand signals
-
Hypothesis #2
aspect of mention frequency
and mention source in
More and more, these queries return
you polled people on the street to tell
you what brands they most
-
Hypothesis #3: Google is using
search & visit patterns to connect
words & phrases and rank results
Why do they list these 3 in the top
10? My guess