Bad & Toxic Backlinks You Should Avoid via @sejournal, @BennyJamminS

Link building is a complicated art form with many different tactics and approaches.

Despite being one of the most mature processes in SEO, there’s still much disagreement about what makes a “bad” or “good” link building strategy, including effectiveness vs. risk, and what tactics Google can detect or punish a website for.

This post will help you determine what to avoid when link building or vetting the tactics of a new service provider.

I’m not going to claim to put any disagreements to rest, and if you’re a particularly experiment-minded SEO you might find this post a little on the conservative side.

As with all things in the industry, there’s inconsistency between what Google says and what works, and everyone benefits from those who experiment and push boundaries.

But I’m taking a conservative approach that follows Google’s guidelines closely for two core reasons:

  • This post is for readers looking for reliable and sustainable strategies. I don’t advise that you use experimental or high-risk tactics when it comes to link building if you don’t already know what you’re doing and what the risks are.
  • You should take the guidelines as a statement of intent, not absolute or current truth. Even if a link building tactic that goes against Google’s guidelines works now, there is reason to believe that Google intends to address it.

Types Of Unnatural Links

A an unnatural link is any link that is created for the purposes of manipulating search engines or that violates Google’s spam policies.

The following are some of the most common types of unnatural links.

Buying Or Selling Links

There is nothing fundamentally wrong with paying for a link or exchanging some kind of product or service for a link as long as the nature of the relationship is disclosed and the links are not for SEO purposes.

Buying, exchanging, or trading for links for SEO is the problem. Links for SEO are supposed to be a choice influenced only by the content on the page.

If your content is highly valued and people choose to link to it for that reason, then you deserve SEO benefits.

When you enter money or value exchanges into that dynamic, it breaks the ideal purpose of SEO links and introduces a high potential for manipulation. In such cases, Google requires marking the link as rel=nofollow or rel=sponsored so that the links do not pass SEO value. As long as you or the parties linking to you do this, for the most part, there’s no problem.

Here is an example of implementing nofollow and sponsored attributes:

Here are some ways that buying or selling links can fall afoul of Google’s spam policies:

  • Text advertisements with links that pass SEO signals because they haven’t been identified with “nofollow” or “sponsored.”
  • Paying for articles that include links that pass SEO signals.

Another way to buy links is to pay someone to create them for you. In this case, a service provider does that work of creating assets, reaching out to acquire links, or both. As long as this service provider doesn’t engage in shady tactics of their own and doesn’t give you links on domains that they own, this is totally fine.

Keep in mind that the “buying” and “selling” definitions are not limited to an exchange of currency.

It describes any kind of relationship where something is exchanged for a link, like a product.

As Matt Cutts explained in 2014, Google aligns pretty closely with the FTC on what it understands to be a “material connection” between a link provider and link recipient:

  • If a party receives enough value to reasonably change their behavior, a material connection must be disclosed.
    • A pen or a t-shirt likely won’t change behavior (unless received for the explicit purpose of reviewing / linking to it).
    • A direct payment for a link, a gift card, or a product with a high dollar value likely changes behavior and incentivizes a link.
    • An item loaned has different implications than an item given.
  • Consider the intended audience: if you’re giving things away for reasons other than to acquire links (for example as part of a conference attendance gift package), then disclosure might be necessary, but it might not be strictly necessary to ask all those people to mark links as sponsored if they choose to talk about it.
  • Consider whether a link relationship would be surprising: it makes sense that a movie reviewer might see a movie for free. It makes less sense that a tech reported would get to keep a laptop they’re reporting about without disclosure.

Link Exchange Agreements

Link exchanges are similar to buying links because they involve an exchange of value.

Mutual linking happens often, and when it occurs organically, it’s no problem. It makes perfect sense for some websites to link back and forth.

But you need to watch out for any kind of agreement. “Link for link” is a no-go, and if you do it often enough, it can become easy to spot.

The thing about links is that any time you give or get a link for a reason other than the value and relevance of the link itself, it’s easy to spot – likely easier than you think.

The occasional bit of back rubbing isn’t a big deal. When given a few different choices of websites to reference, it makes sense that people would choose those they already know or have existing relationships with.

That’s generally fine. The problem comes when you enter into specific agreements: You link to me, and I’ll link to you.

The video below explains the difference between a link that’s an editorial choice and a link that’s based on an agreement.

Private Blog Networks

Private blog networks (PBNs) are networks of sites created to artificially inflate the rankings of one specific central website.

Basically, one entity controls an entire network of websites and can use a few different specific linking methods to manipulate to pass authority and SEO value around.

This network can then be used to artificially inflate the rankings of other websites by linking out to them.

In order for this tactic to work, all the websites need to have relationships or be owned by the same entity.

This is a pretty clear violation of Google’s guidelines, and it’s also pretty easy to spot.

Sites that are part of these networks can be penalized, and if you’re a little too lax with user-generated content on your site, you could find yourself accidentally becoming one.

If you accept any kind of content from external parties, scrutinize it carefully, especially links. Skip down to “How To Spot Shady Links” to find out more.

Unnatural Links From Forums, Blog Comments, And Other User-Generated Content

User-generated content is tricky when it comes to links. Ideally, a random person loves your content so much that they use you as a reference. Not so ideal is faking it.

Comments, forums, blogs, guestbooks, and even sites like Reddit might be tempting sources for links, and in the right context, they can absolutely be part of a healthy backlink profile. You can even link to yourself if you’re genuinely engaging in a relevant discussion. Google doesn’t consider all comment links and UGC links to be spam.

However, it’s a bad idea to try and engineer these links as part of a mass strategy.

The first thing to keep in mind is that many user-generated content (UGC) websites have blanket nofollow attributes on outgoing links. It’s an old tactic, so many high-quality communities moderate UGC heavily. This means that doing this effectively requires effort. The big question to ask yourself is: does the comment add genuine value to the community?

Most commonly, people execute these links unnaturally using bots to post automatically. Generally, automated posting using bots isn’t exactly valuable, and you’ll be flagged and moderated out of those communities.

Automated Link Syndication

There are tons of ways to automate links, but Google considers automating links at scale to be spam.

There are plenty of ways to safely automate your content processes, but we aren’t talking about that. We’re talking about using automation to post content externally from your website purely to acquire SEO links.

From automated article spinners to bots that will post comments and social media posts, if you’re intentionally building links “at scale,” then the chances are high that you’re building toxic links.

This could look like an automated press release or directory posting. It could look like low-quality article directories, which are often filled with spammy content that is widely distributed.

Generative AI has enabled new forms of automation for links and content, so it’s important to consider the overall principles in Google’s and the FTC guidelines when you evaluate novel functions and strategies.

Links In Distributed Widgets

People sometimes engage in automated link building by adding links to widgets distributed to multiple websites. Google clarified its stance on this and provided examples of manipulative widgets.

This kind of link building is pretty easy to spot, and it’s pretty clear that these types of links don’t add value.

Using Expired Domains To Build Links

Expired domain abuse is another tactic Google is wise to, but that doesn’t stop people from trying it.

One way that expired domains can be used to build unnatural links is by purchasing it and then redirecting it to another website. The idea is that all of the authority and backlinks belonging to the expired domain will be forwarded through the redirect. Don’t do this.

Any Link Can Be Bad If It’s Lazy Enough

Does the automated press release spam mean you shouldn’t send press releases? No!

Does the prevalence of poor-quality directors mean you can’t use directories in a high-quality way? Also no!

This goes for many link building strategies. There’s usually a high-effort, valuable version and a low-effort, spammy version.

Take guest posting as an example.

If you’re an expert in your field and take the time to write useful content aligned with E-E-A-T best practices, that’s valuable.

If you want to reach new audiences, you could send that post to a website with a large reach. It makes sense for that website to then link back to you as a reference for readers if they like your writing and want to learn more.

This is an ideal linking relationship. A website has chosen your content because it provides value to its readers and links to you as the source of the expertise.

But when one party turns lazy, this becomes toxic.

A website might decide that, for whatever reason, it makes sense to start allowing poor-quality content with links.

Maybe it starts charging or uses a big catalog of content to build an affiliate strategy.

On the other side, link builders might generate poor-quality content with links and post it on websites that either don’t mind or don’t know better. Or they might try and sneak them by following stricter editorial guidelines.

When one side of the equation gets lazy, guest posting becomes a manipulative linking strategy.

The Risk Of Manual Actions

The most likely risk of an unnatural link is that it will be a waste of time and/or money.

If you build a link for SEO that goes against Google’s guidelines, algorithms will simply ignore it either immediately or at an unspecified time in the future when they discover it.

If you have many toxic links and you’re using a strategy that the algorithms don’t immediately catch, this can open you up to a sudden reduction in SEO effectiveness.

At some point, Google will likely release an update that improves how the algorithms detect the links.

When that happens, if you have many of them, the adjustment can significantly impact your rankings and traffic. This can look like a targeted penalty, but generally, it isn’t.

Google uses automated systems and manual actions to punish toxic and spammy link building, but generally, you’re safe from this action unless you’re intentionally using these tactics on a large scale.

On the other hand, you can receive specific penalties for unnatural links, both coming to your site or going out from your site.

Unnatural links manual action notification in search console.Unnatural links manual action notification in search console.

Links To Your Site Vs. Links From Your Site

If you host unnatural links from your site to other sites, you may be hit with a manual action. This indicates to Google that you’re on the supply side of the ecosystem it’s trying to stop.

A large number of unnatural links coming from your website could cause Google to decide it doesn’t trust you and issue a penalty. This will be communicated to you in Google Search Console. These penalties can be reversed, but generally this requires you to fix the problems and submit a request for reevaluation.

This video from Google about unnatural links from your site explains more. It’s your responsibility to ensure that your site does not host unnatural links. This video from Google provides a great overview. Remember: “A natural link is an editorial choice.”

For example, if you use your domains to host bad link tactics and sell links to others, you’re at a high risk of receiving a manual penalty from Google that suppresses or removes your website from the Search index.

You can also receive a manual penalty for unnatural links to your website. This seems less likely, because there are many cases where it wouldn’t be fair to punish a website for incoming links. However, you might still receive a manual penalty if Google is confident that you are trying to manipulate your ranking.

This video from Google about unnatural links to your site has more information.

How To Spot Shady Links

A good link is a genuine interaction of trust between two parties.

Spotting shady links is actually pretty easy, especially when there’s a pattern.

If you’re auditing your backlink profile or putting a potential service provider through their paces, here are some signs to look for.

1. New or young sites on blogging domains.

If you notice links from blogging subdomains ( e.g. blogger.com ) to your website, especially if they aren’t directly relevant, appear in high numbers (without nofollow attribute), or even in some cases where the blog has your website or brand name, this is a sign that someone was building shady links to your website.

This is a good indication of a PBN.

You should ask a link building service provider whether they create new websites to build links. This is a red flag.

2. Many unnatural links from unrelated forums.

Links like this can indicate automated link building with bots. Generally, using UGC sites to build links is against the terms of service of those websites.

Usually, the strategy involves pretending to be a genuine user. If you have to pretend you’re someone you’re not, it’s a shady link.

3. Links from irrelevant websites and directories.

Relevance really does matter with links, and if you’re looking through a link profile and see domains that just don’t make sense, they bear investigation. For example if you are a recipe publisher a link from plumber’s article is highly irrelevant. That means it was likely the result of an unnatural link building technique.

However, if you add your website to relevant directories that have value from the users’ perspective, this can be totally fine. For example, you should add your restaurant website to Yelp, which is used by 32M active users who look for reviews before booking a reservation. Check our list of directories that still matter.

If you want to learn more about link building and its many pitfalls, check out SEJ’s ebook The Dark Side Of Link Building.

More resources: 


Featured Image: Jakub Krechowicz/Shutterstock

6 Web Hosts Ranked By Core Web Vitals: One Outperforms All via @sejournal, @martinibuster

HTTPArchive is offering a new technology comparison dashboard, currently in beta testing. Users can now view real-world web hosting performance scores for Core Web Vitals. We compare six web hosts and find one that consistently performs better across nearly all metrics.

About HTTPArchive

HTTPArchive tracks websites through crawling and with data collected in the Chrome User Experience Report (CrUX). It publishes reports about the technologies that power websites, including Core Web Vitals performance of content management systems like WordPress and Wix.

New Technology Comparison Dashboard – Beta

HTTPArchive has new reports under development, one of which is a comparison of Core Web Vitals and Lighthouse performance scores by web hosts. HTTPArchive also tracks the median page weight by web hosts but it’s still under development and is in Beta testing.

The new reports allow comparison by web hosts. There isn’t data yet for many web hosts but there is for the following six. Comparing web hosts by core web vitals is not a totally fair comparison. A web host like Ionos might host many thousands of small and local sites which might not be resource intensive.

So with those caveats, here are the six web hosts under comparison:

  1. Bluehost
  2. GoDaddy
  3. HostGator
  4. IONOS
  5. SiteGround
  6. WP Engine

Core Web Vitals By Web Host

The following are the list of web hosts by percentage of sites hosted at each one that pass Core Web Vitals. The HTTPArchive says that thise report is still under development and, as previously mentioned, the percentages don’t necessarily reflect the quality of the web hosts themselves, but rather the quality of the sites hosted there.

This is the description of the CWV metric scores:

Passes Core Web Vitals
The percentage of origins passing all three Core Web Vitals (LCP, INP, CLS) with a good experience. Note that if an origin is missing INP data, it’s assessed based on the performance of the remaining metrics.”

However, it’s interesting to see that the number one web host is a managed WordPress web host because that may indicate that the platform itself may be optimized better than a general web host. The following scores are based on a snapshot taken at the beginning of September.

Core Web Vitals Scores In Descending Order

  • WP Engine 70%
  • GoDaddy 67%
  • SiteGround 65%
  • HostGator 58%
  • Ionos 58%
  • Bluehost 45%

Largest Contentful Paint (LCP)

LCP measures the perceived page loading speed, how fast the page appears to load for a site visitor.

HTTPArchive defines this metric:

“Largest Contentful Paint (LCP) is an important, stable Core Web Vital metric for measuring perceived load speed because it marks the point in the page load timeline when the page’s main content has likely loaded—a fast LCP helps reassure the user that the page is useful. Good experiences are less than or equal to 2.5 seconds.”

WP Engine again comes out on top, perhaps indicating the quality of the sites hosted on that platform as well as the performance optimizations that are a key element of that web host.

LCP Scores In Descending Order

  • WP Engine 79%
  • GoDaddy 78%
  • SiteGround 75%
  • HostGator 69%
  • IONOS 69%
  • Bluehost 52%

Cumulative Layout Shift (CLS)

HTTPArchive also provides a comparison of the six web hosts by the CLS score. CLS measures how much a web page shifts around as it’s rendered in a web browser. A score of 0.1 or less for 75% of visitors is recommended. The percentages for each of the web hosts were all higher than the 75% minimum. This time WP Engine is tied for first place with HostGator.

CLS Scores In Descending Order

  • WP Engine 88%
  • HostGator 88%
  • Bluehost 87%
  • SiteGround 86%
  • IONOS 85%
  • GoDaddy 84%

First Contentful Paint (FCP)

FCP measures how long it takes for the content to become visible. A low FCP means that the content is rendered quickly. The number one ranked web host for FCP turns out to be GoDaddy, ahead by a significant margin of 7 points. WP Engine comes in second, followed by SiteGround.

FCP Scores In Descending Order

  • GoDaddy 73%
  • WP Engine 67%
  • SiteGround 62%
  • IONOS 60%
  • HostGator 57%
  • Bluehost 39%

Time To First Byte (TTFB)

TTFB measures how long it takes from to download the first byte of a resource after it’s requested by a browser. GoDaddy scores top of the list again.

TTFB In Descending Order

  • GoDaddy 59%
  • IONOS 45%
  • WP Engine 39%
  • HostGator 38%
  • SiteGround 37%
  • Bluehost 25%

Interaction to Next Paint (INP)

This metric represents the overall responsiveness of the entire web page.

HTTPArchive explains what this score means:

“INP is a metric that assesses a page’s overall responsiveness to user interactions by observing the latency of all click, tap, and keyboard interactions that occur throughout the lifespan of a user’s visit to a page. The final INP value is the longest interaction observed, ignoring outliers. A good experience is less than or equal to 200ms.”

The scores are the percentage of pages that provide a good INP experience. WP Engine is back on top for INP but the other five web hosts are not far behind.

INP Scores In Descending Order

  • WP Engine 95%
  • SiteGround 94%
  • Bluehost 92%
  • GoDaddy 90%
  • HostGator 89%
  • IONOS 88%

Lighthouse Performance Score

Lighthouse is an open source auditing tool that scores web pages for performance, SEO, and other metrics. The performance scores for the six web hosts are fairly close to each, clustering on either side of a performance score of 40.

This is HTTPArchive’s description of this score:

“In general, only metrics contribute to your Lighthouse Performance score, not the results of Opportunities or Diagnostics.”

Interestingly, HostGator ranks the highest for the Lighthouse Performance score, with GoDaddy and Ionos tied for second place. The other three were tied for third place, by one point less than the second place. Nevertheless, HostGator was the clear winner for the Lighthouse Performance score metric.

Lighthouse Performance Scores

  • HostGator 43
  • GoDaddy 40
  • IONOS 40
  • Bluehost 39
  • SiteGround 39
  • WP Engine 39

HostGator came out near the top for Core Web Vitals and scores at the top of the list for the Lighthouse Performance metric. WP Engine is clustered with two other web hosts scoring 39 points.

Lighthouse Accessibility Scores

The accessibility scores are clustered similarly to the performance scores, on either side of a score of 85.

This is how HTTPArchive describes this metric:

“The Lighthouse Accessibility score is a weighted average of all accessibility audits. Weighting is based on axe user impact assessments. Each accessibility audit is pass or fail. Unlike the Performance audits, a page doesn’t get points for partially passing an accessibility audit.”

Accessibility Scores In Descending Order

  • GoDaddy 87
  • Bluehost 86
  • WP Engine 86
  • SiteGround 86
  • HostGator 85
  • Ionos 85

Lighthouse SEO Scores

The SEO scores were even more tightly clustered, with GoDaddy scoring the highest of the six web hosts under comparison.

HTTPArchive describes what the SEO Score is measuring:

“These checks ensure that your page is following basic search engine optimization advice. There are many additional factors Lighthouse does not score here that may affect your search ranking, including performance on Core Web Vitals.”

SEO Scores In Descending Order:

  • GoDaddy 91
  • Bluehost 88
  • WP Engine 88
  • HostGator 88
  • IONOS 88
  • SiteGround 88

Lighthouse Best Practices Score

The last score is interesting because it measures if the hosted sites are created with web development best practices. HTTPArchive doesn’t explain at this time what those best practices are.

Here’s the description of this score:

“This ensures that your page is built using modern web development best practices.”

Best Practices Scores In Descending Order

  • Bluehost 79
  • HostGator 79
  • SiteGround 79
  • WP Engine 77
  • GoDaddy 77
  • IONOS 77
  • Takeaway

HTTPArchive is expanding on what it is measuring. The performance dashboard is still in Beta and under development, meaning that it may have bugs but that it’s ready for a public preview. It’s interesting to see a managed WordPress host come on top. The scores will be more meaningful once there are more managed web hosts that can be compared against each other, which may provide a more meaningful comparison. Nevertheless, this is a good start.

Visit the new dashboard here and provide your feedback to make it better.

Featured Image by Shutterstock/TierneyMJ

New Ecommerce Tools: November 14, 2024

This week, our rundown of new tools from companies offering services to ecommerce merchants includes updates on holiday marketing campaigns, drone deliveries, analytics and insights, search, video generators, and several AI-based platforms.

Got an ecommerce product release? Email releases@practicalecommerce.com.

New Tools for Merchants

Amazon opens Virtual Holiday Shop, a 3D shopping experience. Amazon has launched Virtual Holiday Shop, a virtual shopping experience that uses three-dimensional technology powered by the Amazon Beyond virtual store. Inside the shop, visitors experience music, animations, and a guided search for gifts. Visitors can add products directly to a cart and then check out as usual. Per Amazon, the Virtual Holiday Shop spotlights selections of the top 100-plus gifts, stocking stuffers, holiday decor, and premium products, including customer favorites.

Web page showing Amazon's Virtual Holiday Shop

Amazon’s Virtual Holiday Shop

WPForms launches AI-powered form builder for WordPress. WPForms, a WordPress plugin, has released an AI-powered form builder to automatically generate customizable forms for contact-us, surveys, registrations, and feedback. Users describe what they want through an AI chatbot, and WPForms AI generates a form. The builder can translate entire forms into multiple languages, automatically set up conditional logic, and tweak or adjust forms afterward.

eBay mobile app adds traffic and performance data. Performance Insights is now live on the eBay mobile app to help merchants understand and improve their businesses. With Performance Insights, sellers can view real-time traffic graphs, track listing views, and monitor click rates and traffic sources — all on the go.

CapCut launches a video content platform for ecommerce merchants. Short-form editing app CapCut by ByteDance has launched Commerce Pro, a platform for ecommerce sellers and creators to produce and scale ads and branded content. The AI video generator instantly converts the URL of a product into ad videos with links to the products. AI-generated presenters assist with product demonstrations, explainer videos, and more. AI models can virtually try on products and generate photos for showcasing.

Home page of CapCut Commerce

CapCut Commerce

Buy-now, pay-later provider Affirm expands to the U.K. Affirm, a U.S.-based fintech firm, has launched its BNPL loans in the U.K. According to Affirm, the U.K. offering will include both interest-free and interest-bearing payment options. Interest on its plans will be fixed and calculated on the original principal amount, so it won’t increase or compound. The U.K. expansion is Affirm’s first outside of the U.S. and Canada.

Coveo partners with Shopify on scalable AI search and commerce experiences. Coveo, a commerce experience platform that leverages search and generative AI, has partnered with Shopify to bring its AI capabilities to enterprise customers. Coveo says its platform enables Shopify enterprise merchants to manage AI models and strategies for search relevance, personalization, real-time recommendations, unified indexing, and generative shopper experiences for product discovery and session optimization.

Contentsquare expands its analytics platform with advanced AI features. Contentsquare, an analytics provider, has upgraded its AI-driven Experience Intelligence platform to help marketing, product, and tech teams work more efficiently — with flexible purchasing options for businesses of all sizes. According to Contentsquare, the genAI CoPilot offers immediate insights and recommended next steps, summaries of customer sentiment, automatic session replays, and more. Contentsquare has also added heatmaps, enhanced customer feedback, and expanded analysis.

Home page of Contentsquare

Contentsquare

Zenapse launches AI-powered marketing platform on Google Cloud Marketplace. Zenapse, an AI-powered marketing platform utilizing emotional intelligence, has launched the ZenImpact Optimization Studio on Google Cloud Marketplace. Zenapse states Google Cloud Marketplace users can access its AI-driven psychographic signals, which analyze consumer thoughts, feelings, and beliefs, combined with demographic and behavioral data, to predict in real-time which content, products, and offers will resonate most with an audience. This launch will help marketers enhance business outcomes and gain deeper customer insights.

DreamHost partners with ecommerce solution provider Ecwid by Lightspeed. DreamHost, a provider of web hosting and managed WordPress services, has partnered with Ecwid by Lightspeed, enabling individuals and businesses to set up online stores and scale their businesses through multiple channels. According to DreamHost, the partnership means customers can quickly set up an online store without technical expertise. The solution includes built-in real-time reporting, marketing tools, and integrations for scaling. DreamHost customers have immediate access to Ecwid’s free tier.

Brizy launches a page builder for Shopify. Brizy, a London-based developer of website-building tools, has launched a landing page builder for Shopify store owners. With its drag-and-drop interface, users can design custom pages, product showcases, and marketing materials without needing any coding skills. For a limited time, Shopify users can try Brizy’s free plan. Brizy’s library includes over 90 templates and advanced elements such as countdowns, pop-ups, and alert bars.

Amazon expands drone delivery in Arizona. Amazon is expanding Prime Air drone delivery in the West Valley of metro Phoenix. Customers who live near Amazon’s Same-Day site in Tolleson, Arizona, and purchase an eligible item weighing five pounds or less can have it delivered by drone in under an hour. Tolleson’s Same-Day Delivery site is a hybrid — part fulfillment center and part delivery station. Amazon’s new MK30 drones will deploy from the facility.

Photo of an Amazon Prime Air drone

Amazon Prime Air: Phoenix Metro Area Drone Deliveries