Update to Moz SEO Ranking Factors recommendations

2013 ranking factors update

Value:

Recommended link: Moz SEO Ranking factors 2013 edition

Many SEOs everywhere have now been following the SEOmoz (now Moz) ranking factors for a very long time – I think I start recommending them in training in 2005, can that be right?!

Over time the analysis has become more complex with a move from trusted experts’ opinion to additional correlation based analysis. In many ways I prefer the original breakdown of on and off page factors for its simplicity – as shown below, but there are many more factors to consider now of course.

The best overall summary on ranking factors for non specialists is, for me, still the Experts’ analysis.

SEO ranking factors 2013 1

SEO ranking factors 2013. Source: Moz Experts opinion.

This shows, according to Moz, that

  • Links are still believed to be the most important part of the algorithm (approximately 40%).

  • Keyword usage on the page is still fundamental, and other than links is thought to be the most important type of factor.

  • SEOs do not think social factors are important in the 2013 algorithm (only 7%), in contrast to the high correlations.

Since it’s important for SEOs to look into the future so that their SEO, content and social media activity supports their future ranking I thought this summary of opinion was also useful, it shows the need to focus on these factors which we have covered on Smart Insights including Google+ authorship, perceived value (the long click referenced in our mobile SEO factors summary) and structured data.

SEO ranking factors 2013 2

SEO Future ranking factors 2013

The main SEO ranking factors – 2007 style

I have retained this summary from previous versions of this post since it can help newbies understand the SEO ranking factors better. I have used  the summary below of the main on and off-page SEO factors based on v2 ranking factors report on my training courses and books for a long time since they give a one page snapshot. I continue to do so before showing the newer data since it shows the relative importance of factors like the title tag well and the relative unimportance of the meta keywords…

On-page optimisation:

  • <title> tag = 4.9/5
  • Keyword frequency and density = 3.7/5
  • Keyword in headings = <h1> = 3.1, <h2> = 2.8
  • Keyword in document name = 2.8
  • Meta name description = 2/5
  • Meta name keywords = 1/5

This is useful to highlight the myth of the importance of meta tag which so many generalist marketers seem to cling to… I would rate the meta name factors even lower.

Off-page optimisation:

  • Link anchor text contains keyword = 4.4/5
  • More backlinks (higher PageRank)= 4/5
  • Link Popularity within the Site’s Internal Link Structure=4/5
  • Page assessed as a hub = 3.5/5
  • Page assessed as an authority = 3.5/5
  • Link velocity (rate at which changes) = 3.5/5

This Slideshare presentation from Mozcon is a good way to browse the latest correlations covering specific such as the type of anchor text which is most effective in ranking.

  • http://www.whiteboxseo.co.uk Elliot Zissman

    Useful data from a technical perspective, but in my opinion there is still the question of how to get good links coming in… and the answer to that must surely lie in having great content – your site must be useful, interesting, relevant and unique. A good SEOr must know the above, but must focus on how to get the website owner to publish the right content. Do you agree?

    • http://www.davechaffey.com Dave Chaffey

      Totally agree Elliot,

      With the many negative factors i didn’t discuss in this post, quality links are becoming more important all the time and the only way to get these is through quality content as I discussed in this post on Link building success.

      Also I think social media and bookmarking is under emphasised in the SEOmoz report and effective social media also requires quality content.

      I think the move to integrating SEO / social media as services for agencies and SEO/social media job roles for clients is a reflection of this trend.

      Perhaps I and others should write more on content / “linkbaiting” options!

      Dave

  • Pingback: Trust economies, Facebook demographics and Hitler’s 3 testicles | Customer Engagement Unit

  • http://www.jppmarketing.com Julia Papageorgiou

    Agree with both, great content really has to be the cornerstone not just for organic linkbuilding for SEO but, nowadays, for your website as a whole if you want to keep customers on the site for long enough to convert and to keep them coming back.
    I find that once my clients appreciate the importance of this and shift their focus to creating good content with industry writers or internal people who know their product and ideal clients inside out, they start to create ‘linkbait’ naturally and I just need to guide the optimisation process.
    Have seen great results with content that addresses key client concerns head on or explains and expands on areas of confusion or disagreement within the keyphrase area we are targeting – eg when a query has popped up on high traffic forums that a client can effectively resolve as an expert, we try and jump on it and create a resource around it to point to. If you get one of those right, you are discussed/linked to from highly relevant forums, discussion boards, articles, social networks etc.
    Dave – would love to read more from you on ways to maximise links from great content.

    • http://www.davechaffey.com Dave Chaffey

      Thanks Julia,

      Always useful to have prompts to create posts to help others.

      On maximising links from content, I think getting links is trickier with the advent of Twitter, since many prefer to Tweet rather than blog and link back to source although this gives you one form of links from Twitter.

      Here are some top-of-mind ideas,

      Write articles, create tools, with link-building in mind – who is your target audience not only to read, but also to link to and bookmark
      Be useful – this is why lists to how-to-guides work well in B2B space – this is my preferred approach.
      Be controversial
      Mention, review or generally big-up other companies or people and they may link to you.
      Use a range of techniques, not just articles – SEOMoz has a great list of link-bait ideas, e.g. comprehensive diagrams/charts work for social media
      Viral seeding – seed your article to different sources, or break it down into different parts which are useful for and can be seeded to different audiences

      I’ll turn that into an article next month!

      What do you think Julia – what are your ideas?

  • http://www.jppmarketing.com Julia Papageorgiou

    Dave – I think it will make a great article! I especially agree with the part about big up for other companies, think it helps to point to resources from others, especially when valuable. Also makes you more believable as a source if you are not constantly plugging your own content.
    Have seen very good results with how-to articles and top 10 lists of pointers and yes think nowadays the only problem with these is that they are becoming very popular so more effort is required to make your list unique, innovative and completely original. I think emphasis should be on encouraging feedback, edits or growth of the list from other users.
    I also like the controversy idea – sometimes inviting criticism and negative commentary makes the article so much more interesting as then it really becomes a discussion rather than one-sided view.
    Look forward to reading it!

  • http://www.alancharlesworth.eu Alan Charlesworth

    Hi Dave – excellent aticle [as usual ;-) ]

    Sorry I’m late to the party on this one, but I just received the newsletter in which it is featured. I’ve a couple of points to add.

    First off – and I appreciate why it was not part of your article – but I always lead any SEO talk/seminar/etc on the choice of suitable/relevant keywords. Everything you quite rightly include as ‘on-page’ and some of the ‘off-page’ stuff all revolves around the keywords. It’s no good having ‘your’ choice of keyword in all the ‘right’ places if the target market is searching on other terms.

    Secondly, I am a great supporter of the concept that the search engines try to look at a website as a human does – and so the on-page aspects are common sense. Well … at least they are common sense to me, but then my introduction to the Internet was with a book publisher who was moving online circa 1996.

    This publishing background meant that when using basic html to build a website, it was ‘common sense’ to:

    * Include the subject of the page in the page title tag [the same as we did for a book chapter]
    * Include the subject in the content – how do you write about [for example] ‘super turbo widgets’ without without using the words ‘super turbo widgets’ in the text
    * Include the subject in the tag – it is the ‘headline’ of the page and so tells the reader what the page is about [paper-based publishing again]
    * Include the subject [eg super turbo widgets] in the meta tags as they describe the content of the page to the search engines [at least they used to do, but now-a-days the description tag's role in SERPs should not be ignored]

    OK, so things might have moved on ‘off-site’, but these basic issues remain as a sound foundation for any other ‘advanced’ SEO efforts. I would even argue that some aspects of the off-site SEO will flow ‘naturally’ from getting these basics right. As Julia points out in her response, good content is essential, and good content will ‘naturally’ include the keywords – if it doesn’t, it’s talking about a different subject!

  • Pingback: SEO Ranking Factors

  • http://www.digitalsuccess.co.uk/ Digital Success

    Good overview Dave! Like the pie chart, I think that the break down of the factors was helpful. Although with
    ” tag = 4.9/5
    * Keyword frequency and density = 3.7/5
    * Keyword in headings = = 3.1, = 2.8
    * Keyword in document name = 2.8
    * Meta name description = 2/5
    * Meta name keywords = 1/5″
    I was supprised that the meta description was put as more important than meta keyword, I thought that the description tatg was not used anymore.

    • http://www.davechaffey.com Dave Chaffey

      Hi – the original score out of 5 are nearly 3 years old now and are based on many expert reviews.

      I would personally rate meta keywords as 0 and meta description as 1 – not because it has any ranking benefit in Google – neither of these ever have. Rather the description is in the SERPs so can encourage clickthrough and show the benefits of a site / brand.

    • http://www.activeinternetmarketing.com/ Michael Myles

      I was surprised, too.

      As far as search rankings go, I would have both keywords and description at a 0. Neither has ANY effect on SERPs, so I don’t understand why anyone would give them any cred at all.

      If it was a ‘Traffic from Organic Listings’ then I would say that description provides click-through rate improvements, but it doesn’t effect rankings.

      • http://www.smartinsights.com/ Dave Chaffey

        Yes agree, Michael, thanks for the comment. Of course the meta description does affect assessment of duplicate content, so it is worth keeping distinct for key pages for that reason as well as SERPs CTR.

  • Pingback: Smart Insights guest blog – Testing page titles & meta descriptions « digitaljuggler

  • Pingback: Testing page titles & meta descriptions | Digital Juggler

  • Pingback: Testing page titles & meta descriptions - Digital Juggler

  • Pingback: Updates and advice on the main digital marketing platforms from July 2013 | IDM Marketing Blog

  • iMysecy

    tag and Link anchor text contains keyword are the most important part of SEO.

    Thanks for such a informative article Dave.

  • rakesh

    Is there anyone who have own seo concept to rank well on Google on globally because whenever I search for this I got only seomoz followers and according to me they made it very complicated as I think for a successful seo we need to focus very natural way ! and I would say this is one of copy paste article.

  • SEO Services

    I agree with the article totally as we have all seen and heard how google now works and they focus heavily on social media and some of their own tools and how big your network is. Also most people don’t keep their listings consistent with address phone number and some other details so they have different info all over the web but only 1 location making it hard to rank for a certain area. If you ever change locations you should go back and change your information to keep it consistent with your actual location.
    seo services in Hyderabad

Feedback Form
Feedback Form