Local listings aren't being crawled?
-
Hello, SEO brainiacs. Here is the problem I can't figure out:We have a lot of clients and all of them have local listings, such as Insider Pages, Yahoo local, Bing locals, Yelp, Yellow Pages etc etc etc.
And all of those local listing have company's website link. But none of those links are considered (found) in reports, such as opensite explorer or in Link Analysis Section of Moz PRO.I do know that MOZ crawl considers only high DA websites, but all of local listing domains have above 80-90 DA score, so they can't be NOT crawled.
I will say that some local listings do appear on very few reports, but far not all of them.
So, what can be the problem?
-
Hi Charles. I don't work for Moz, so my recommendations are my own.
Also, I pay for a pro subscription here as well, and also combine resources from multiple sources when I'm really trying to get into the minutae of each and every back link. Ultimately it's a lot cheaper than creating my own crawler and index to try and duplicate Google. In your example with clients on local, you were likely involved in developing those links so why not keep track of them in-house versus 3rd party tools? Personally my only need I have for trying to get 100% of backlinks reported is if I run into a situation with a manual action client and need as robust as a disavow list as possible. Often times you can find these sorts of links via Google searches alone due to repetitive exact match keyword usage.
The most value I get out of OSE is when I'm comparing the back link profiles of my sites versus those of the competition that are appearing in the rankings. I can usually come up with more than enough work to keep myself busy when using the tool in this manner.
If you're specifically trying to manage local listings, Moz Local may be a better tool for your purposes. Cheers!
-
Thanks for a response.
Your answer does make sense, besides one thing:
We are paying MOZ for PRO subscription and instead of providing fully operational tool, I am being referred to other services?!
That's nice...
Everybody knows that GWT is very incorrect on many-many-metrics, ahrefs and majestic are not free (or at least not full versions of their tools). Hoping to get the most relevant results and SEO picture, we go with MOZ and that's what we get?! "Go check out other services"?
Shame... shame...
-
Hi Charles. It could be that due to Mozscape going after a wider diversity of domains, they're not crawling as deeply where your clients have local links. Here's Rand's explanation from the Jan 27 update:
The second is that we crawled a massively more diverse set of root domains than ever before. Whereas our previous index topped out at 192 million root domains, this latest one has 362 million (almost 1.9X as many unique, new domains we haven't crawled before). This means that DA and PA scores may fluctuate more than usual, as link diversity are big parts of those calculations and we've crawled a much larger swath of the deep, dark corners of the web (and non-US/non-.com domains, too). It also means that, for many of the big, more important sites on the web, we are crawling a little less deeply than we have in the past (the index grew by ~31% while the root domains grew by ~88%).
Bolded for my emphasis. If you cross link from your client sites to their local review listings to help / prompt users to fill out reviews you're likely to see more of those pages indexed in OSE. However, they could still be not counted if they're not considered important enough for that domain, i.e. if they're not in the top 1000 Yelp pages on yelp.com (numbers are just for example purposes of the idea... not accurate). Make sense?
Google however still likely knows about the links and is applying the related associations. And feel free to use other tools (GWT, aHrefs, Majestic) when trying to create a complete backlink profile for clients. Cheers!
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
-
MOZ doesn't work for .dating and .chat domain extensions
I have been a MOZ subscriber for a few years now. I don't think MOZ works for .dating and .chat domain extensions. I have 2 sites that have authority 1 despite back links. Here are the details: https://oooo.dating > DA = 1 https://talk.chat > DA = 1 oooo has 221 links (Google search console) talk has 1317 links (Google search console) May be a MOZ staff member can look into this. If you are customer and use some of the newer domain extensions please share your details if you have the same problem.
Link Explorer | | dmcubed1 -
Is Moz's backlink checker.... just... not good?
Hey everyone! Can somebody explain to me why this keeps happening: Whenever I'm trying to backlink my competitors, I typically use RavenTools. Every time, without fail, if I put that same URL into Moz's Open Site Explorer - It gives me about 1/20th of what RavenTools shows me. Sometimes it literally comes up with 2 or 3 links total. Unfortunately, RavenTools has a cap on how many backlink checks you can perform in a month - so once I've used those up, I have to start using OSE... But, it just doesn't work. Does anyone else have this issue? Thanks!
Link Explorer | | TaylorRHawkins1 -
Spam Score and crawling of my site
Hello, I'm trying to analyze the spam score of my site which is 9/17 Actually I have few backlinks and all of them have a low spam score (max 4/17, just one). I think there's some kind of issue with the crawler since I get strange spam factors: Large Site with Few Links (likely true, I recently deleted a lot of tags used once) Low Number of Pages Found (wasn't it a "Large Site"??) Low Number of Internal Links (I got a considerable number) No Contact Info (I have a link to my facebook in the menu and a "contacts" page) Thin Content (It's just a blog with min 300 words per post, why thin?) Site Link Diversity is Low (likely true) Ratio of Followed to Nofollowed Subdomains (likely true) Low MozTrust or MozRank Score (true) Ratio of Followed to Nofollowed Domains (likely true) Can you please help me to understand it, is it a crawling problem or similar? If needed I will post the url of the website. Thank you so much Marco
Link Explorer | | MarcoBP0 -
Use Open Site Explorer and the Keyword Difficulty Tool to find your competitors' keywords and how they're ranking for them. Get your Daily SEO Fix!
In today's Daily SEO Fix, Jacki walks through using Open Site Explorer's anchor text report to find keywords your competitors may be targeting, and how to use the Keyword Difficulty Tool to tease out what's helping them rank. Watch "Keyword Research with OSE and the Keyword Difficulty Tool" now! The Daily SEO Fix is an ongoing series of Moz tool tips and tricks in under 2 minutes. To watch all of our videos so far, and to subscribe to future ones, make sure to visit the Daily SEO Fix channel on YouTube. If you'd like a more in-depth guide to using the Keyword Difficulty Tool and its Full SERP Analysis Report for competitive insights, check out Cyrus Shepard's excellent Moz Academy video on the subject.
Link Explorer | | MattRoney1 -
What's the Story on Mozscape Updates?
Hey gang, As you may be aware, we were considerably late with our last index release. You have my sincere apologies for that and the apologies of the entire team. In the interest of transparency, I want to try to explain what's been going on. Since stepping down as CEO, I've been asked to take on a few roles in the company. One of those is product architect (basically the product owner) of our Big Data team, who produces the Mozscape link index. For several years, that team has been almost exclusively focused on getting us closer to a near real-time indexing system that does not have scalability issues. Mozscape is currently smaller than our major competitors, and we're also often slower. Our metrics (PA, DA, MozRank, MozTrust, Spam Score, Social Data, etc) have been the unique value we provide, but it's not enough. We need to be competitive on size and freshness. Building a raw link index (without processed metrics like PA/DA et al) is hard, but it's possible. Building a link index with those metrics is really tricky, and requires computer science knowledge and skills far beyond the scope of my understanding. That's what our team's been working on, and they've made some progress, but it's been slow, hampered by unknown unknowns, and materially hurt by a lack of experienced talent we can hire to help (we've had open job posts for years now). In the meantime, our historic Mozscape index structure keeps encountering challenges - this latest round is still somewhat unexplained (we believe there's hardware issues compounded by how the system is architected to handle large domains, but there may be other issues). The team's struggled to split time between keeping the old Mozscape running and hunkering down to finish the new system. I'm trying to help them balance things as best I can, and we're going to be putting effort toward making sure we get index releases out on time. However, to do that, we'll need to scale down size, and then rebuild back up. We think we can do this while also improving the prioritization of which links we crawl (e.g. deeper on important domains that link out, less so on deep pages that don't link anywhere) so the index overall improves. However, I don't want to minimize the risks - we may have some slow updates, some smaller indices, and some less-than-ideal data in the next one or two indices while we work to remedy this issue. I HOPE we don't, and that things actually get better immediately, but we can't promise that until the work gets finished. TL;DR - Mozscape V2 is in development and will let us as big and faster as any link index. In the meantime, current Mozscape's having issues & we're making smaller indices in an attempt to diagnose and repair. As always, thanks for your understanding, continued support, and if you have any questions, feel free to leave them below. I realize that this level of service/product quality is NOT OK, and I'm doing everything in my power to fix it.
Link Explorer | | randfish8 -
Duplicated content detected with MOZ crawl with canonical applied
Hi there! I have a slight problem.
Link Explorer | | Eurasmus.com
I have a site with Joomla 3.3 that we recently migrated from 2.5. Joomla, for some reason that I don´t really get, creates hundreds of weird urls for the site like
mydomain.com/en -> joomla creates en/home/149-xxx-xxx/xxxxxx-xxxxxx that links to the first one.
The new version 3.3 knows this bug and applies a rel=canonical to the ones created "artificially", so they should not be identified as duplicated. Sample piece of code: en/home/149-all-en/xxxxxxx-xxxxxx" rel="canonical" / MOZ crawler identifies this as duplicated and like this I have thousands of pages duplicated all with titles, content etc... all the ones created by joomla. Still my site has good SEO results and I can not see any penalties but I am a bit concerned they may come in the future.... Can anyone explain me what is happening? Thank you in advance for your time,0 -
Repeated mysterious 404's from ancient site structure killing my rankings
Several years ago I changed my site structure to go from a flash based site to a blog based wordpress site. After doing so I went from page 1 to page 30 for my relevant search terms. I have employed people to help me track down the problem and I believe that they have narroed it to the existance of 404's being created from some unknown internal source. I have been for years getting links like this... <colgroup><col width="792"></colgroup>
Link Explorer | | dfphotographer.com
| http://www.dfphotographer.com.au/brisbaneweddingphotographer/2011/10/brisbane-wedding-photographer-charisma-and-steve-victoria-park-brisbane/?share=facebook http://www.dfphotographer.com.au/brisbaneweddingphotographer/2011/10/brisbane-wedding-photographer-charisma-and-steve-victoria-park-brisbane/charisma-and-steve-301/?share=email http://www.dfphotographer.com.au/brisbaneweddingphotographer/2011/10/brisbane-wedding-photographer-charisma-and-steve-victoria-park-brisbane/photography-brisbane-04-2/?share=email http://www.dfphotographer.com.au/brisbaneweddingphotographer/2011/10/brisbane-wedding-photographer-charisma-and-steve-victoria-park-brisbane/photography-brisbane-12-2/ http://www.dfphotographer.com.au/brisbaneweddingphotographer/2011/10/brisbane-wedding-photographer-charisma-and-steve-victoria-park-brisbane/photography-brisbane-13-2/ http://www.dfphotographer.com.au/brisbaneweddingphotographer/2011/10/brisbane-wedding-photographer-charisma-and-steve-victoria-park-brisbane/photography-brisbane-13-2/?share=facebook http://www.dfphotographer.com.au/brisbaneweddingphotographer/2011/10/brisbane-wedding-photographer-charisma-and-steve-victoria-park-brisbane/photography-brisbane-13-2/feed/ http://www.dfphotographer.com.au/brisbaneweddingphotographer/2011/10/brisbane-wedding-photographer-charisma-and-steve-victoria-park-brisbane/photography-brisbane-16-2/?share=email | ......regularly showing in webmaster tools, (this is from a top pages report from MOZ where there are hundreds also shown). When I do a moz crawl of the site, none of these links show up. Therefore I have no way of finding the source of these links (they also do not show me the source in WMT as they should). We have completely cleared the site and rebuilt it and although it is still only a couple of weeks in it still does not appear to have stopped them. Does anyone have any way of helping me find the source of these mysterious 404's?0 -
Is there an option that's more precise over Open Site Explorer?
I've had folks explain to me before that OpenSiteExplorer is just an estimation, etc. but there are some fairly easy statistics that seem to be different and it makes me nervous that either its wrong or I'm doing something wrong. As you can see in the image, moz isn't read social metrics correctly. It actually used to be pretty spot on, but as you can see with Google+'s its off. Maybe not a big deal right? But for my clients new Moz Analytic print outs it makes somewhat of a difference. Any help? UlwQs3w
Link Explorer | | jonnyholt0