Why there is no even close correlation between MajesticSEO data and Open Site? Explorer?
-
I compared my site home page against my competitor homepage with Open Site Explorer and I found that according Open Site Explorer I have only 3 backlinks where in MajesticSEO I have more than 100 backlinks in 'Historic' data and more 90 in '30 days fresh data'.
Why there is no even close correlation between MajesticSEO data and Open Site Explorer?
How SEOMoz count backlinks?
-
What's so awesome about a fresh index when it thoroughly confuses the issue (includes dupes from weird sessionIDs/URL parameters, etc). If MajesticSEO isn't showing accurate link count numbers, I have no use for it.
Mike Corso
Cool Site of the Day
The Internet's Oldest Directory
http://www.coolsiteoftheday.com -
We did a bunch of work on this a while back, so my stats are probably not up to date (I think around October of 2010). Basically, we compared Yahoo! Site Explorer numbers, Google numbers (via the crappy but somewhat proportional link: command), Exalead, SEOmoz, Majestic and Alexa.
Majestic was definitely odd and so was Alexa. Neither of those two mapped/correlated well to the quantities reported by the others. Thus, for example, if xyz.com has:
- 50 links according to Google
- 1,000 links according to Yahoo!
- 500 links according to SEOmoz (Linkscape/OSE)
And site abc.com has:
- 100 links according to Google
- 2,000 links according to Yahoo!
- 1,000 links according to SEOmoz (Linkscape/OSE)
The percentages of quantity will match up fairly well for these, but not for Majestic (e.g. they might show 5,000 links for xyz.com and 3,500 for site abc.com).
This is a bit odd, but we don't know exactly why. They crawl a ton more links than even what Google/Yahoo!/Bing reportedly do, which could be part of it, but my best guess is the canonicalization and freshness issues. Since MJ crawls the web all the time, and doesn't build "indices" every X time period (like Google/Yahoo!/Bing/Linkscape), but rather maintains a single consistent link index to which new sites/links are added, the data structures may be different.
Majestic also appears, at least to us, to do far less canonicalization, removal of unnecessary URL parameters, etc. Thus, if one site links from 50,000 pages due to weird session IDs in the URL, that might bias the crawl and link count, but standard canonicalization will normalize these.
I really don't mean to bash on a competitor - MJ's fresh index is awesome, their tools are good, and a ton of SEO folks find them useful, including myself. But, on the index matching and link count numbers, we definitely see this same weirdness that many other SEOs do.
Hope that helps!
-
Opensiteexplorer more or less takes a representative random sample of the available links. More prominent links have a tendency to be visible on opensiteexplorer rather than majestic seo. Also check out yahoo links.
-
Can you provide the site url?
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
-
Data that shows people who click on paid vs organic listings
Hey Everyone, I've been searching for data on the percentage of people who click on paid vs organic. My last stats which are now outdated show 60% of the people click on organic on average and 40% click on paid. Any help/links would be greatly appreciated.
Competitive Research | | JohnSammon0 -
Site Ranking for keywords that they haven't targeted in content
There is a site that I am constantly battling for the #1 spot for a particular keyword and I can't see that they are doing any link building, they are not using any anchor text for the keyword "at all" just their company name (not exact match) and their content doesn't even contain the keyword. I used Open site explorer to analyze their activity, but they are doing something I can't figure out from that data. Any other tools to use? I have higher quality links than them, post content nearly 5 times per week to my blog and their blog hasn't been updated in ages, I kill them in social media, there isn't one instance that they are better than my site and I only build quality driven links, no blog comment crap and get featured on lots of industry blogs for our work. I distribute my content very effectively, I just can't figure it out. They were no where about 5 months ago now they are tearing it up for lots of keywords in the industry top spots. I can build a few links and surpass them, but I have to do it every week or so and I think they are doing something fishy. I just want to figure out what they are doing and bury them. I don't want to post their url and mine here as I don't want them to see this post in search results.
Competitive Research | | photoseo10 -
Penguin Case Study: Need sites that were hit
I am currently trying to do a massive study on Penguin right now, you can read more about it here if you wish http://www.seomoz.org/q/my-penguin-recovery-attempt Anyways I need some data, can anyone who is willing give me a list of known sites that were hit from Penguin 1.0 Only. This can include the 2 Data refreshes after that, but basically nothing from 2.0 I also need a site in the same niche that you are aware of that did not get hit from Penguin 1.0. Possibly the #1 guy at the top would be nice. So I need Domains Hit from Penguin 1.0 Top Domains in same niche that were not hit You can send me a message with the domain if you are not comfortable posting it here. Thanks all ahead of time 🙂
Competitive Research | | cbielich0 -
C Block Links in Open Explorer
Hi there, Wondering if anyone can help me with understanding the advanced reports in Open Explorer. I'm looking to create a list of competitors links to go after but don't want to create loads of links from the same c blocks for blog posts, articles etc. In open explorer it says my competitor has 451 linking C Blocks but when i download csv's using advanced reports with the filter of 'links that come from the same C block', the csv only has 26 links. The same happened with the filter 'from the same ip address'. How can i download and analyse the links so I can see all the linking C blocks and know which sites I want to use and which ones I want to avoid? Thanks, Ross
Competitive Research | | Will_Craig1 -
Identify keywords certain sites target
Hello, I've been asked to identify what keywords a group of blogs/communities might target so that we might gain some insight for our own SEM purposes. It's been several years since I used SEOmoz's tools, so they have changed a lot. I couldn't remember if you had such a tool, but it appears you do not--or at least not that I am finding. I was wondering if anyone could point me in the direction of such a tool where I can input a subdomain, and have a report stating which keywords are the ones the domain rates highly for. To be clear: I'm not looking for a traffic estimation or anything; simply a breakdown of what keywords a specific page or domain support most. P.S. I did a search on here for certain terms like "competitive keyword targets" and so forth, and saw no matching QA. I'm sorry if there is a duplicate! Thanks,
Competitive Research | | krisgosser
Kris0 -
My site is ranked in the top 5 for my keywords, but howcome I'm low in an organic search results for my key words?
Are the other factors such as page rank, Alexa rating and mozRank used to determine where I will show up in search results, over Goggle's key word rank for my key words?
Competitive Research | | allstatetransmission0 -
How can a site rank higher when you beat them by A LOT on virtually every SEOMOZ factor?
Any insight into what's driving these results would be appreciated. Another site ranks #6 and we rank #22 on a keyword that scores 67% for "Keyword Difficulty", but we score significantly higher than them on almost every ranking factor including having nearly 10 times more backlinks along with higher PA and DA scores,etc. Here is a comparison from the Keyword Difficulty Tool report. Question: What could be going on? Factor and ranking comparison (us v. them) with our higher rankings are listed first. PA: 61 v. 39, mozRank 5,85 v. 4,54, mozTrust 6.00 v. 5.49, mT/mR = 1.0 v. 1.2, total links = 4,198 v. 90, internal links = 4198 v 90, external links = 275 v. 57, followed links = 4171 v 85, no follow links = 27 v 5, linking root domains = 46 v 30 on-page grade = A v B broad keyword usage in title: yes v yes broad keyword usage in document: yes v yes keyword used in url = no v no keyword used in domain = partial v no KW exact match - no v no exact anchor text links = 2373 v 13 %links w/ exact anchor text = 56% v 14% linking root domains w/ exact anchor text = 7 v 8 % linking root domains w/ exact anchor text = 15% v 26% partial anchor text links = 0 v 0 Domain Authority = 54 v 27 Domain mozRank = 5.4 v 3.2 Domain mozTrust = 5.8 v 3.7 DmT/DmR = 1.1 v 1.2 External links to domain 9261 v 63 Linking root domains to this domain = 355 v 33 linking c- blocks domains to domain = 267 v 30 tweets = 4 v 3 FB shares = 13 v 11 Google Plus one shares = 1 v 0
Competitive Research | | rickt0070 -
How does a site get to no 3 in Google with no KW in their links?!!
Hello everyone, my first post - ahhh I'm investigating a niche and there is a site that should have no right being there in my view. It's no. 3 Google UK for 'company formation' with a small site with 65 weak links from only 7 domains and hosted in the US. But more importantly, the Open Site Explorer says there is not 1 link with that term in its anchor text. This I find crazy and makes me suspicious. But before I go back to my client saying "oh they must be black hat" I would like your expert views. I'm not sure whether to tut or congratulate them and for the first time I'm not sure what reasons to give for their amazing performance! What's your views?
Competitive Research | | GOYMedia480