Unless you've had your head under a rock you've undoubtedly heard the rumblings of a coming Google Penguin update of significant proportions.
To paraphrase Google’s web spam lead Matt Cutts the algorithm filter
has "iterated" to date but there will be a "next generation" coming that
will have a major impact on SERPs.
Having watched the initial rollout take many by surprise it make
sense this time to at least attempt to prepare for what may be lurking
around the corner.
Google Penguin: What We Know So Far
We know that Penguin is purely a link quality filter that sits on top of the core algorithm, runs sporadically (the last official update was in October 2012), and is designed to take out sites that use manipulative techniques to improve search visibility.
And while there have been many examples of this being badly executed,
with lots of site owners and SEO professionals complaining of
injustice, it is clear that web spam engineers have collected a
lot of information over recent months and have improved results in many verticals.
That means Google's team is now on top of the existing data pile and
testing output and as a result they are hungry for a major structural
change to the way the filter works once again.
We also know that months of manual resubmissions and disavows have
helped the Silicon Valley giant collect an unprecedented amount of data
about the "bad neighborhoods" of links that had powered rankings until very recently, for thousands of high profile sites.
They have even been involved in specific and high profile web spam actions against sites like Interflora, working closely with internal teams to understand where links came from and watch closely as they were removed.
In short, Google’s new data pot makes most big data projects look
like a school register! All the signs therefore point towards something
much more intelligent and all encompassing.
The question is how can you profile your links and understand the
probability of being impacted as a result when Penguin hits within the
next few weeks or months?
Let’s look at several evidence-based theories.
The Link Graph – Bad Neighborhoods
Google knows a lot about what bad links look like now. They know where a lot of them live and they also understand their DNA.
And once they start looking it becomes pretty easy to spot the links muddying the waters.
The link graph is a kind of
network graph
and is made up of a series of "nodes" or clusters. Clusters form around
IPs and as a result it becomes relatively easy to start to build a
picture of ownership, or association. An illustrative example of this
can be seen below:
Google assigns weight or authority to links using its own PageRank
currency, but like any currency it is limited and that means that we all
have to work hard to earn it from sites that have, over time, built up
enough to go around.
This means that almost all sites that use "manipulative" authority to
rank higher will be getting it from an area or areas of the link graph
associated with other sites doing the same. PageRank isn't limitless.
These "bad neighborhoods" can be "extracted" by Google, analyzed and
dumped relatively easily to leave a graph that looks a little like this:
They won’t disappear, but Google will devalue them and remove them from the PageRank picture, rendering them useless.
Expect this process to accelerate now the search giant has so much
data on "spammy links" and swathes of link profiles getting knocked out
overnight.
The concern of course is that there will be collateral damage, but
with any currency rebalancing, which is really what this process is,
there will be winners and losers.
Link Velocity
Another area of interest at present is the rate at which sites
acquire links. In recent months there definitely has been a noticeable
change in how new links are being treated. While this is very much
theory my view is that Google have become very good now at spotting link
velocity "spikes" and anything out of the ordinary is immediately
devalued.
Whether this is indefinitely or limited by time (in the same way
"sandbox" works) I am not sure but there are definite correlations
between sites that earn links consistently and good ranking increases. Those that earn lots quickly do not get the same relative effect.
And it would be relatively straightforward to move into the Penguin
model, if it isn't there already. The chart below shows an example of a
"bumpy" link acquisition profile and as in the example anything above
the "normalized" line could be devalued.
Link Trust
The "trust" of a link is also something of interest to Google.
Quality is one thing (how much juice the link carries), but trust is
entirely another thing.
Majestic SEO has captured this reality best with the launch of its new Citation and Trust flow metrics to help
identify untrusted links.
How is trust measured? In simple terms it is about good and bad neighborhoods again.
In my view Google uses its Hilltop algorithm, which identifies
so-called "expert documents" (websites) across the web, which are seen
as shining beacons of trust and delight! The closer your site is to
those documents the better the neighborhood. It’s a little like living
on the "right" road.
If your link profile contains a good proportion of links from trusted
sites then that will act as a "shield" from future updates and allow
some slack for other links that are less trustworthy.
Social Signals
Many SEO pros believe that social signals will play a more significant role in the next iteration of Penguin.
While social authority, as it is becoming known, makes a lot of sense
in some markets, it also has limitations. Many verticals see little to
no social interaction and without big pots of social data a system that
qualifies link quality by the number of social shares across site or
piece of content can't work effectively.
In the digital marketing industry it would work like a dream but for
others it is a non-starter, for now. Google+ is Google’s attempt to fill
that void and by forcing as many people as possible to work logged in
they are getting everyone closer to Plus and the handing over of that
missing data.
In principle it is possible though that social sharing and other
signals may well be used in a small way to qualify link quality.
Anchor Text
Most SEO professionals will point to anchor text
as the key telltale metric when it comes to identifying spammy link
profiles. The first Penguin rollout would undoubtedly have used this
data to begin drilling down into link quality.
I asked a few prominent SEO professionals their opinions on what the
key indicator of spam was in researching this post and almost all
pointed to anchor text.
“When I look for spam the first place I look is around exact match
anchor text from websites with a DA (domain authority) of 30 or less,"
said Distilled’s John Doherty. "That’s where most of it is hiding.”
His thoughts were backed up by Zazzle’s own head of search Adam Mason.
“Undoubtedly low value websites linking back with commercial anchors
will be under scrutiny and I also always look closely at link trust,”
Mason said.
The key is the relationship between branded and non-branded anchor
text. Any natural profile would be heavily led by branded (e.g.,
www.example.com/xxx.com) and "white noise" anchors (e.g., "click here",
"website", etc).
The allowable percentage is tightening. A recent study
by Portent found that the percentage of "allowable" spammy links has
been reducing for months now, standing at around 80 percent pre-Penguin
and 50 percent by the end of last year. The same is true of exact match
anchor text ratios.
Expect this to tighten even more as Google’s understanding of what natural "looks like" improves.
Relevancy
One area that will certainly be under the microscope as Google looks
to improve its semantic understanding is relevancy. As it builds up a
picture of relevant associations that data can be used to assign more
weight to relevant links. Penguin will certainly be targeting
links with no relevance in future.
Traffic Metrics
While traffic metrics probably fall more under Panda than Penguin,
the lines between the two are increasingly blurring to a point where the
two will shortly become indistinguishable. Panda has already been subsumed into the core algorithm and Penguin will follow.
On that basis Google could well look at traffic metrics such as
visits from links and the quality of those visits based on user data.
Takeaways
No one is in a position to be able to accurately predict what the
next coming will look like but what we can be certain of is that Google
will turn the knife a little more making link building in its former
sense a more risky tactic than ever. As numerous posts have pointed out
in recent months it is now about
earning those links by contributing and adding value via content.
If I was asked what my money was on, I would say we will see a
tightening of what is an allowable level of spam still further, some
attempt to begin measuring link authority by the neighborhood it comes
from and any associated social signals that come with it. The rate at
which links are earned too will come under more scrutiny and that means
you should think about:
- Understanding your link profile in much great detail. Tools and data
from companies such as Majestic, Ahrefs, CognitiveSEO, and others will
become more necessary to mitigate risk.
- Where you link comes from not just what level of apparent "quality" it has. Link trust is now a key metric.
- Increasing the use of brand and "white noise" anchor text to remove obvious exact and phrase match anchor text problems.
- Looking for sites that receive a lot of social sharing relative to your niche and build those relationships.
- Running back link checks on the site you get links from to ensure
their equity isn’t coming from bad neighborhoods as that could pass to
you.
Posts
