Any SEO thoughts about Google's new Data Highlighter for products?
-
After searching around on the web for a while I couldn't find any case studies or interesting posting about Google's new feature to highlight structured data. In Google Webmaster Tools you can now tag your products to be displayed as structured data in Google's search results. Two questions that rose immediately:
1. What effect will Google's new Data Hightlighter for products have on your SEO? Can we expect better CTR's for productspage results in Google? Better conversion rates perhaps? Any case studies that show KPI improvements after using structured data for products?
2. I would love to see some examples in the search results to see what productpages would look like after Data Highlighting it.
Your thoughts or input about this subject will be much appreciated.
-
Hi SDIM, unfortunately I'm not in a position to be posting specific URL's as these are live client sites. I have noted a few URL's that did get picked up properly showing their product review scores similar to IMDB listings. As demonstrated at: How Rich snippets/schema markup help SEO.
However as I have said it's very picky about actually using the data sets provided, I would recommend using Schema markup in the site template/layout if possible versus relying on Google's highlighting tool.
-
I have been testing this on some of my clients accounts, but without no effect so far.
-
Hi James, thanks for you feedback. Would you care to share some sample search terms where you ecommerce site did show up with mark-up in the SERP results?
-
Although not related directly to data highlighter for products, I have used data highlighter for events. Like James says, Google seems to have a problem identifying a set even though I've added multiple examples. I terms of performance, it's only been a month or so since it was set up but there has been no discernable impact so far.
-
I've used the tool on a single domain in a shop environment, unfortunately I've seen little to no effect. I did notice however that Google's tool is relatively poor at picking up it's own highlights once set. This may just be my personal experience with the tool though.
I have on the other hand used schema mark-up on another eCommerce site and seen not only improved CTR, but the SERP results returned have tended to be more accurate and useful (in my eyes) for customers/potential customers.
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
Meta Keywords is relevant in SEO yet ?
Hello, meta keywords is relevant to use in SEO yet? If yes, how many words is recommended to use? Regards, Leandro
Algorithm Updates | | lmoraes0 -
Is it bad from an SEO perspective that cached AMP pages are hosted on domains other than the original publisher's?
Hello Moz, I am thinking about starting to utilize AMP for some of my website. I've been researching this AMP situation for the better part of a year and I am still unclear on a few things. What I am primarily concerned with in terms of AMP and SEO is whether or not the original publisher gets credit for the traffic to a cached AMP page that is hosted elsewhere. I can see the possible issues with this from an SEO perspective and I am pretty sure I have read about how SEOs are unhappy about this particular aspect of AMP in other places. On the AMP project FAQ page you can find this, but there is very little explanation: "Do publishers receive credit for the traffic from a measurement perspective?
Algorithm Updates | | Brian_Dowd
Yes, an AMP file is the same as the rest of your site – this space is the publisher’s canvas." So, let's say you have an AMP page on your website example.com:
example.com/amp_document.html And a cached copy is served with a URL format similar to this: https://google.com/amp/example.com/amp_document.html Then how does the original publisher get the credit for the traffic? Is it because there is a canonical tag from the AMP version to the original HTML version? Also, while I am at it, how does an AMP page actually get into Google's AMP Cache (or any other cache)? Does Google crawl the original HTML page, find the AMP version and then just decide to cache it from there? Are there any other issues with this that I should be aware of? Thanks0 -
Google sidebar advertising dropped
Has anyone noticed how the google sidebar advertising has completely disappeared? They only display top 4 adwords and then remaining on the bottom of each search page. I can't find any info on it or when it actually happened?
Algorithm Updates | | Purplesars110 -
New feature in seo results with icon?
I have never seen it before in the search: an icon in the title. Do you guys know how to get this icon in the title? See here: http://snag.gy/e7BiI.jpg e7BiI.jpg
Algorithm Updates | | Emilija1 -
Are you still seeing success with EMD's?
I am curious if any other SEO's are still seeing success with exact matching domains. I am not seeing ANY changes to any of my clients rankings since the "Exact Match Domain" filter came about in September. Also while I have conducted SERP audits in my neck of the woods I am noticing EMD's are still doing very well. What are you seeing?
Algorithm Updates | | clarktbell0 -
Google spitting out old data as new alerts
Am I just unlucky or are others seeing this too? I have several google alerts. For the past 6 months, google keeps sending crap along with good stuff. its a bit like their search results. There are three types of Alerts they send that I'm not impressed with. 1. Alerts that are from unintelligible splogs that take real news stories and rewrite them with unintelligible garbage that makes no sense at all. Sometimes, they serve up new alerts from the same splogs I saw several months ago, that I felt sure they would have zapped by now. 2. Old stories, that have been around for months. I just received one that was from January, from TechDirt, a big site that must get a huge amount of attention from google. 3. Irrelevant stories because they love to show how smart they are by splitting my alert keyword text into multiple words, but it gives useless results. This is the kind of stuff that crappy search engines like AltaVista used to do. Is google reverting to the childhood of search with all these changes?
Algorithm Updates | | loopyal0 -
Google Update on the 6th July
Hi Mozzers, Has anyone noticed a Google update on the 6th July? A price comparison site I optimise has fallen off the SERPs for most generic terms, however still getting traffic for longer tail phrases. Cheers Aran
Algorithm Updates | | Entrusteddev0 -
Google changing case of URLs in SERPs?
Noticed some strange behavior over the last week or so regarding our SERPs and I haven't been able to find anything on the web about what might be happening. Over the past two weeks, I've been seeing our URLs slowly change from upper case to lower case in the SERPs. Our URLs are usually /Blue-Fuzzy-Widgets.htm but Google has slowly been switching them to /blue-fuzzy-widgets.htm. There has been no change in our actual rankings nor has it happened to anyone else in the space. We're quite dumbfounded as to why Google would choose to serve the lower case URL. To be clear, we do not build links to these lower case URLs, only the upper. Any ideas what might be happening here?
Algorithm Updates | | Natitude0