Reciprocal
links are not dead. Weren't dead
before. Aren't dead now. I know
it and you know it. But for just
a second let's pretend otherwise.
A while back there was quite
a bit of scare mongering going
around the SEO industry about
how reciprocal links were dead.
I had a potential client once
tell me that so-and-so-big-name-in-the-SEO-industry
told them that reciprocal links
were dead. I've said this before
and I'll say it here again.
There
is nothing wrong with reciprocal
links. It's all about how
you use/implement them that
matters. No, reciprocal links
are not dead and now I have
the proof.
Last year I decided to run
my own test so I could refute
what I already knew to be true.
Yeah, I know who cares about
reciprocal links now, right?
The fear tactics have run their
course and, frankly, nobody
is engaged in old-school mass
reciprocal link swapping (for
the love of God people, if you're
still doing that, knock it off!)
But for the sake of science
and posterity, I now, over a
year later, present the results
of my (almost forgotten) reciprocal
link test.
The Set-Up
On one of my sites I created
a master testing page. From
this page I linked to eight
new pages created specifically
for this test. Each of those
pages contained a few paragraphs
of content with the word "reciprocallinksarenotdead" linked
to an external web site. The
goal was to watch the search
results to see what sites
appeared in the SERPs for
our test term.
For the sake of creating
a good testing ground, we
linked to four sites that
linked back and four sites
that didn't. From here we
split things up even further
by linking to two sites in
each group to that we considered
to be "high authority" for
their industry, and two that
we considered to be "lower
authority" for their industry.
We then split this again using
one to link using the target
site's keyword in the link
and the other not.
The Sting
I started out checking up
on this daily seeing if Google,
Yahoo or MSN cached the pages
linking out and then watching
if/when they showed up in
the SERPs. The result was
quite a roller coaster ride.
One day the test pages would
be cached and the next day
the cache date was from several
days prior. This happened
frequently. The same thing
with the SERPs. One day all
the test pages would show
up and the next day gone and
then the next day just some
of the test pages showed up
and the next others, but not
necessarily the ones from
the previous day. It was interesting
to watch.
After about several weeks
of daily monitoring I started
to cut back to every few days,
then weekly then, well I kind
of forgot about it with the
occasional thought "Hey, I
wonder how that test is going",
in which I'd take a quick
look and forget all about
it again. Here we are now,
over a year later and I think
I can confidently display
the results as definitive.
The Results
Google's result page:
- Low authority, non reciprocating
site
- Low authority, non reciprocating
site (keyword in link)
- Low authority, reciprocating
site (keyword in link)
- High authority, reciprocating
site (keyword in link)
- Test page linking to #9
below
- Test page linking to #2
above
- Low authority, reciprocating
site
- High authority, reciprocating
site
- High authority, non-reciprocating
site (keyword in link)
Google supplemental results
show the remainder of the
testing pages. Missing
from SERPs: High authority,
non-reciprocating site.
Yahoo's result page:
- Low authority, reciprocating
site
- High authority, non-reciprocating
site
- High authority, reciprocating
site
- Test page linking to #8
below
- Test page linking to #2
above
- Low authority, reciprocating
site (keyword in link)
- Low authority, non-reciprocating
site (keyword in link)
- High authority, reciprocating
site (keyword in link)
- Link to a blog post that
uses keyword as part of
the URL
Missing from SERPs: Low authority,
reciprocating site, High
authority, non-reciprocating
site (keyword in link)
MSN's Result page:
- High authority, reciprocating
site
- Test page linking to #10
below
- Test page linking to #1
above
- Low authority, reciprocating
site (keyword in link)
- Low authority, non reciprocating
site (keyword in link)
- Low authority, non reciprocating
site
- High authority, reciprocating
site (keyword in link)
- High authority, non-reciprocating
site
- High authority, non-reciprocating
site
- Low authority, reciprocating
site
The Happy Ending
We can conclude from that that,
all things being equal, reciprocating
links have no more or less value
than one-way links.
Yeah, I know, we all read Matt
Cutt's post about how excessive
reciprocal linking can hurt,
and I'm sure Matt is right.
But the key word there is "excessive".
If all you do is look for low-quality
reciprocal links that ad no
value to any user's experience
then, yes, that can, and should
do you some harm. But don't
be afraid of reciprocation. If
someone links to you out of
kindness, feel free to link
back to them out of gratitude.
It's not going to hurt you one
bit and the link to you won't
be devalued. Just be
sure you're adding value, not
reciprocating for the sake of
reciprocating.
Guest
author: Stoney deGeyter, Pole
Position Marketing
|
Customer Support • Code of ethics