Ranking factors on the Nordics

2,289
-1

Published on

Published in: Marketing, Technology, Design
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
2,289
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
8
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
15
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Ranking factors on the Nordics

  1. 1. Ranking Factors Of The Nordics SWE, NOR, FIN, DK Marcus Tober Stockholm 10/15/2013 10/16/2013 ® Searchmetrics Inc. 2013 Page 1 │
  2. 2. Founder of Searchmetrics I‘m in love with SEO and search since 2001 Study of computer science in Berlin, so I’m the techie
  3. 3. Made with Love in Berlin 120 passionate People Innovator in SEO Software since 2007 Follow us twitter.com/searchmetrics facebook.com/Searchmetrics
  4. 4. If you want to get the deck send an email to marcus@searchmetrics.com with “Deck SMX Stockholm”
  5. 5. Business Product Website
  6. 6. World Wide Web
  7. 7. Ranking S
  8. 8. Ranking Factors – 2013 • Basis: • • • • google.se / google.no / google.fi / google.dk Top 3 SERPs 10.000 Keywords Organic search results (no paid search) • Average Values according to the respective Position/s in the SERPs • Correlation ≠ Causation 10/16/2013 ® Searchmetrics Inc. 2013 Page 13 │
  9. 9. Google Ranking Factors US 2013 10/16/2013 ® Searchmetrics Inc. 2013 Page 14 │
  10. 10. Google Ranking Factors US 2013 vs 2012 Change 10/16/2013 ® Searchmetrics Inc. 2013 Page 15 │
  11. 11. Google Ranking Factors US 2013 vs 2012 Panda EMD 10/16/2013 ® Searchmetrics Inc. 2013 Page 16 │ Penguin
  12. 12. GOOGLEvolution Aug./Sept 2013
  13. 13. SEOvolution
  14. 14. Ø
  15. 15. =
  16. 16. Ranking Factors – SWE 2013: Onpage Keyword in Description A low correlation does not necessarily mean low ranking factor
  17. 17. Ranking Factors – SWE 2013: Onpage Keyword in Description Low/near-zero Correlation BUT: ~45% have that Feature BRANDS
  18. 18. Quality over quantity
  19. 19. Don‘t overuse ads!
  20. 20. Focus on content
  21. 21. Link Features
  22. 22. Ranking Factors – US 2013: Links Anchor Text! 10/16/2013 ® Searchmetrics Inc. 2013 Page 38 │
  23. 23. Ranking Factors – SWE 2013: 10/16/2013 ® Searchmetrics Inc. 2013 Page 39 │ Links
  24. 24. Ranking Correlations: Number of Backlinks Backlinks
  25. 25. Ranking Correlations: Backlinks Number of Backlinks Much more Backlinks on foremost Positions!
  26. 26. Ranking Correlations: Backlinks Ø SEO Visibility of backlinking URL
  27. 27. Ranking Correlations: Backlinks Ø SEO Visibility of backlinking URL High SEO Visibility of Link Source on foremost Positions!
  28. 28. Ranking Correlations: Backlinks % Backlinks with Stopword
  29. 29. Ranking Correlations: Backlinks % Backlinks with Stopword More Stopwords in Anchortext on foremost Positions!
  30. 30. Ranking Correlations: Backlinks % Backlinks rel=nofollow More Nofollow Links on SERP 1! BRANDS
  31. 31. Ranking Correlations: Backlinks % Backlinks rel=nofollow
  32. 32. Ranking Correlations: Backlinks % Backlinks rel=nofollow BRANDS More Nofollow Links on SERP 1!
  33. 33. Anchor Texts
  34. 34. Ranking Correlation – Keyword Links 10/16/2013 ® Searchmetrics Inc. 2013 Page 50 │
  35. 35. Ranking Correlation – Keyword Links 10/16/2013 ® Searchmetrics Inc. 2013 Page 51 │
  36. 36. Rest In Peace
  37. 37. Mr. „Lin-K-Farm“ If this was part of your strategy building business, good night!!!
  38. 38. It‘s really hard to perform continously good!
  39. 39. But too much lazyness And you become a loser. Be laser sharp and focused all the time.
  40. 40. SEOs are always looking for a single strong signal that they can focus on. This is a behavior since the beginning of SEO. If you still think this is the key to success, you‘ll always fear the next update!
  41. 41. Penguin 2.0 – Loser reeds.com Penguin 2.0 10/16/2013 ® Searchmetrics Inc. 2013 Page 59 │
  42. 42. Penguin 2.0 – Loser 10/16/2013 ® Searchmetrics Inc. 2013 Page 61 │ reeds.com
  43. 43. Penguin 2.0 – Loser reeds.com ! 10/16/2013 ® Searchmetrics Inc. 2013 Page 62 │
  44. 44. Mr. „Lin-K-Farm“
  45. 45. Penguin 2.0 – Loser reeds.com Recovered! Penguin 2.0 10/16/2013 ® Searchmetrics Inc. 2013 Page 65 │
  46. 46. Penguin 2.0 – Loser 10/16/2013 ® Searchmetrics Inc. 2013 Page 66 │ reeds.com
  47. 47. Penguin 2.0 – Loser 10/16/2013 ® Searchmetrics Inc. 2013 Page 67 │ reeds.com
  48. 48. Anchor Texts - Evolution Brand Link Diluted Anchor Neutral Anchor DO: www.domain.com More (Stop)Words here in Anchor Text „Domain“ / Company, Product DON‘T: „Hard“ Anchor Texts 10/16/2013 ® Searchmetrics Inc. 2013 Page 68 │ Generic Terms
  49. 49. Over-optimized…?
  50. 50. Over-optimized…?
  51. 51. „Elegant“ appearance?
  52. 52. Let‘s talk about awesome Penguin recovery stories.
  53. 53. Penguin Recovery: skyscanner.se Recent Recovery Recovery Penguin 1 took 18 Months to recover 10/16/2013 ® Searchmetrics Inc. 2013 Page 74 │
  54. 54. Penguin Recovery: Loser: Week after Penguin Drop on Keyword Level skyscanner.se
  55. 55. Penguin Recovery skyscanner.se Complete Recovery ~#7 #7 10/16/2013 ® Searchmetrics Inc. 2013 Page 76 │
  56. 56. Penguin Recovery skyscanner.se Better than before ~#3 #1 10/16/2013 ® Searchmetrics Inc. 2013 Page 77 │
  57. 57. Penguin Recovery: Winner: Last week Page 78 skyscanner.se
  58. 58. Penguin Recovery: skycanner.se Top Anchor Texts of Backlinks (October 2013) Fewer „hard“ Anchor Texts 10/16/2013 ® Searchmetrics Inc. 2013 Page 79 │ more NEW Brandlinks
  59. 59. They build a lot of links in the past months
  60. 60. They build a lot of links in the past months
  61. 61. Penguin Recovery: check24.de True Recovery Recovery Penguin took 6 Months to recover ca. 03/25/2012 10/16/2013 ® Searchmetrics Inc. 2013 Page 83 │
  62. 62. Penguin Recovery: Loser: Week after Penguin Drop on Keyword Level 10/16/2013 ® Searchmetrics Inc. 2013 Page 84 │ check24.de
  63. 63. Penguin Recovery: check24.de New vs Lost Backlinks –6 Months after Penguin Very good Strategy concerning new Linkbuilding + Removal of bad quality Links. 10/16/2013 ® Searchmetrics Inc. 2013 Page 85 │
  64. 64. Penguin Recovery: check24.de Top Anchor Texts of Backlinks (Around Penguin) „Hard“ Keyword Links 10/16/2013 ® Searchmetrics Inc. 2013 Page 86 │
  65. 65. Penguin Recovery: check24.de Top Anchor Texts of Backlinks (October 2013) Fewer „hard“ Anchor Texts 10/16/2013 ® Searchmetrics Inc. 2013 Page 87 │ more NEW Brandlinks
  66. 66. Onpage (technical) Features
  67. 67. Ranking Factors – SWE 2013: Onpage
  68. 68. Ranking Correlations – 2013: Keyword in URL Onpage
  69. 69. Ranking Correlations – 2013: Keyword in URL Onpage
  70. 70. Ranking Correlations – 2013: Keyword in Domain Onpage
  71. 71. Ranking Correlations – 2013: Onpage Keyword in Domain EMD is still working in the Nordics.
  72. 72. Test #2 Social Signals and Social Graph
  73. 73. Search Engines want to deliver the best results, fresh and relevant to the user. Hundred of millions of people share content every day in social networks. Could there be a reason why search engines wont be interested in this data?
  74. 74. A fresco from the 19th century Where is the value?
  75. 75. Rather than chasing +1s of content, your time is much better spent making great content. Matt Cutts - 08/20/2013 (Head of Google Webspam Team)
  76. 76. What do users click, like, share…? Relevant Content!
  77. 77. Relevant Content! World Wide Web
  78. 78. Social Signals 1 2 3 Click! User Signals
  79. 79. Ranking Factors – US 2013 10/16/2013 ® Searchmetrics Inc. 2013 Page 101 │ Social
  80. 80. Ranking Factors – SWE 2013 10/16/2013 ® Searchmetrics Inc. 2013 Page 102 │ Social
  81. 81. Ranking Correlations – 2013: Google Plusones Social
  82. 82. Ranking Correlations – 2013: Google Plusones Social
  83. 83. Ranking Correlations – 2013: Social Google Plusones BRANDS Much more Social Signals on foremost Positions!
  84. 84. Ranking Correlations – 2013: Facebook Total Social
  85. 85. Ranking Correlations – 2013: Facebook Total Social
  86. 86. Ranking Correlations – 2013: Social Facebook Total BRANDS Much more Social Signals on foremost Positions!
  87. 87. Just trying to decide the politest way to debunk the idea that more Google +1s lead to higher Google web rankings. […] Suffice it to say that I would be very skeptical of anyone who claimed that more +1s led to a higher search ranking in Google's web results. Matt Cutts - 08/20/2013 (Head of Google Webspam Team)
  88. 88. Test Procedure of Tests #1 / #2 Topic Issue 1 Identic Text Text 1a 1b Keyword Set Issue 2 Identic Text Text 2a Keyword 2b Set 10/16/2013 ® Searchmetrics Inc. 2013 Page 110 │
  89. 89. Test #1 Network Signal Takeaways 1.Number of Shares does not influence indexation 2.Shares alone do not necessarily effect indexation 1.PlusOnes nearly instantly effect indexation 2.44 / 48 keywords indexed and ranked on high(est) positions
  90. 90. Test #2 Network Signal Takeaways 1.Number of shares does not influence ranking 2.Shares alone can effect good rankings, but not in the long term 1.PlusOnes effect better rankings in average 2.Few PlusOnes are enough to outperform FBrankings on the same keyword set
  91. 91. Click!
  92. 92. Integration of Social Buttons Facebook Pinterest 4,5% 32,4% 16,1% 13,1% Share This 2,7% 7,5% Addthis 9,8% Google+ 16,6% 10/16/2013 ® Searchmetrics Inc. 2013 Page 114 │ 7,9% Twitter 17,5%
  93. 93. Integration of Social Buttons Facebook Pinterest 3,5% 34,5% 15,6% 13,1% Share This 1,6% 7,4% Addthis 11,8% Google+ 17,9% 10/16/2013 ® Searchmetrics Inc. 2013 Page 115 │ 7,9% Twitter 17,5%
  94. 94. Integration of Social Buttons Facebook Pinterest 3,1% 36,1% 17,9% 12,8% Share This 1,6% 8,6% Addthis 10,3% Google+ 17,4% 10/16/2013 ® Searchmetrics Inc. 2013 Page 116 │ 7,9% Twitter 20,5%
  95. 95. Users are looking for great content/products. Users want to have their problems solved. Users don’t like distraction, salesyness, thin me too stuff. They want to be impressed!
  96. 96. Ranking Factors – SWE 2013: 10/16/2013 ® Searchmetrics Inc. 2013 Page 119 │ Content
  97. 97. Ranking Correlations – 2013: Number of Words in Text Content
  98. 98. Ranking Correlations – 2013: Content Number of Words in Text BRANDS Slightly more Words on better Positions
  99. 99. Ranking Correlations – 2013: Number of Images on Site Content
  100. 100. Ranking Correlations – 2013: Content Number of Images on Site BRANDS More Images on foremost Positions
  101. 101. What is relevant content? What‘s the user intention? What does the user really need?
  102. 102. Query: Chicken Marsala Recipe They rank on #13 http://www.olivegarden.com/Recipes/Main-Dishes/Chicken-Marsala/
  103. 103. Content Optimization 10/16/2013 ® Searchmetrics Inc. 2013 Page 128 │
  104. 104. Content Optimization 10/16/2013 ® Searchmetrics Inc. 2013 Page 129 │
  105. 105. Content Optimization Page 130
  106. 106. Content Optimization 10/16/2013 ® Searchmetrics Inc. 2013 Page 131 │
  107. 107. Ranking Factors – SWE 2013: 10/16/2013 ® Searchmetrics Inc. 2013 Page 132 │ Content
  108. 108. Ranking Correlation – 2013: Proof Keywords Content
  109. 109. Ranking Correlation – 2013: Proof Keywords Content
  110. 110. Ranking Correlation – 2013: Relevant Keywords Content
  111. 111. Ranking Correlation – 2013: Relevant Keywords Content
  112. 112. Your turn…
  113. 113. Searchmetrics – leading vendor of search an social analytics software with international focus 10/16/2013 ® Searchmetrics Inc. 2013 Page 138 │
  1. A particular slide catching your eye?

    Clipping is a handy way to collect important slides you want to go back to later.

×