My Philosophy Behind Analyzing Rankings, Pre/Post-Penalty

[turbin3]

I was typing this as a reply to another thread, but I figured it might be useful as it's own. This is a subject I have spent endless amounts of time mind-fucking myself on, as evaluating off-page ranking factors can truly be an endless rabbit hole with a ridiculous number of variables to consider. Keep in mind, this is purely my own philosophy, based on my experiences, so I'm not stating these things as an absolute truth. Though, I do think there is a lot of evidence to support these beliefs or at least something similar in concept. Especially if you read through some Google patents, and what other data can be found on known ranking factors.

It's been my experience, with a majority of the penalty removal cases I've been involved with, that typically after the penalty is lifted that rankings have basically fallen to where they will based on the backlinks Google has decided to devalue. From that standpoint on, I usually look at the pages that are ranking as if they have fewer backlinks and linking domains, and possibly fewer high authority/trust links. Let me know if that doesn't make sense. Once the penalty is removed, I don't look at it as Google is still "holding the ranking page back", or still punishing it, or has put it on a blacklist, etc. I just look at it simply as a matter of having to build back up those linking metrics, anchor text profile, and trust/authority metrics the same as any page. Penalty removal shouldn't be looked at necessarily as a final solution to all of your ranking problems, but rather as a tourniquet to stop the bleeding. Then it's time for "recovery" and "rehab" to build that page back up (possibly both on and off page factors to build).

Please let me know if that doesn't make sense, and I'll try to explain a different way. I guess what I'm getting at is, it's anyone's guess where a page is going to rank pre and post penalty removal. How does the page stack up in terms of links, social links, linking domains, etc.? Now how does it stack up against the competition, NOT taking into account any of the potentially devalued/disavowed links? Here's some examples:

• Some spammy links may have not been sending link value in the first place, so maybe their being "devalued" and you disavowing them might not have a substantial effect.
• On the other end of the spectrum, you may have some links that were sending significant link value, such as a SAPE or other PBN link, that when devalued and/or disavowed, might then have a substantially negative effect on rankings, and might cause the page to fall hard enough that you need to put some effort into acquiring links of similar trust/authority metrics, in a similar volume, to achieve the results you achieved before.
• Some links, although they may have little to no value, may be providing the linked page (that you're trying to rank) value in some other way. For example, they could be adding to the number of linking domains to the page. They could be adding to the number of linking pages of a certain trust/authority level (in contrast to the same distribution for the competing SERP pages). This is a rabbit hole that is practically limitless, but think peripherally here.

The way I see it, I think the easiest way pre and post penalty removal rankings (from off-site factors) can be boiled down is either:

• Minimal Effect
  • Links being devalued/disavowed possibly provided little to no link value pre-penalty
    • You might notice ranking declining by several spots on the same page, to ~2-3 pages in rank
  • Linking metrics of the page in comparison to competing SERP pages:
    • Links that are devalued/disavowed did not substantially affect (in relation to competing SERP pages):
      • Number of linking domains
      • Number of backlinks to page
      • Overall value and distribution of authority/trust metrics of backlinks to page
        • Moz Page Authority / Domain Authority
        • Majestic Citation Flow / Trust Flow
        • Other similar metrics from Ahrefs, SEMrush, Alexa
        • You name it how far you want to go down that rabbit hole. Some metrics are unique and worthwhile, others are redundant.
  • So
• Medial Effect:
  • Links being devalued/disavowed included some that provided decent link value pre-penalty
    • You will probably notice low to medium effects in your SERP rankings, possibly dropping back by several pages (lets say ~1-4 pages) in ranking
    • Post-penalty, you will likely need to go out and regain a few quality backlinks, possibly from more trustworthy and authoritative domains, to regain whatever link value you lost
  • Linking metrics of the page in comparison to competing SERP pages:
    • Links that are devalued/disavowed had noticeable affects on (in relation to competing SERP pages):
      • Number of linking domains
      • Number of backlinks to page
      • Overall value and distribution of authority/trust metrics of backlinks to page
• Significant Effect:
  • Links being devalued/disavowed included some that provided substantial link value pre-penalty
    • You will notice significant effects in your SERP rankings, possibly dropping back 5-10 pages in ranking
    • Post-penalty, you WILL need to do significant work to regain a significant number of quality backlinks from more trustworthy and authoritative domains
  • Linking metrics of the page in comparison to competing SERP pages:
    • Links that are devalued/disavowed had substantial effects on (in relation to competing SERP pages):
      • Number of linking domains probably dropped considerably
      • Number of backlinks to page probably dropped considerably
      • Overall value and distribution of authority/trust metrics of backlinks to page significantly affected in relation to competing pages

So you were able to successfully get your penalty removed. Great. NOW the work begins. Depending on how your site page(s) were affected and what you had to do to remove the penalty, you may have to do some or a lot of the following:

• Acquire more backlinks
• Acquire a greater number of linking domains
• Acquire links from pages of certain authority and trust levels
• Acquire links from domains of certain authority and trust levels
• Address potential on-page factors (light content, duplicate content, etc.)

The thing I'd really like people to take away from this is, it is somewhat of a "science". Although it's probably not an exact science based on the information we have available to us, it is an exact science on Google's end, with their algorithms, value factors, etc. A lot of people look at this stuff as some sort of black art, but it really isn't. It may be difficult for us to know every single ranking factor involved, but there is enough out there that we can see, that will let you analyze these issues and work towards having a positive effect on them in a successful manner. Between Moz, Majestic SEO, Ahrefs, SEMrush, Link Research Tools, and/or a few other sites out there, you will have more than enough metrics to keep your head spinning. Bottom line, look for deficiencies and work on improving those. Whether it's more links, linking domains, links of a certain trust/authority level, etc.

 

[Napolean]

That was a great read and it really got some wheels spinning for me.

Also not to bring down the tone but when I look at it from the main page the title gets shortened to "My Philosophy Behind Anal..." hahaha

 

[CCarter]

One thing I would add is domain relevancy/category of your backlinks.

 

[Devil Anse]

I agree that you need to be considering PAGE level relevancy and more especially DOMAIN level relevancy. Not just a niche'd page but an entire domain that represents a specific topic. Topical Juice. Topical Flow.

This is a great overview in general of how to compartmentalize links in your head, and shows really which kind we should be going after anyways. Definitely making me think some. Thanks for the share!

 

[turbin3]

That was a great read and it really got some wheels spinning for me.

Also not to bring down the tone but when I look at it from the main page the title gets shortened to "My Philosophy Behind Anal..." hahaha

LOL

@CCarter , definitely. Forgot about that one.

 

[ColdHardCash87]

I personally woudln't even attempt to build Minimal effect links, and even possibly disavow them as you obtain them through shitty scrapers and all that. I'd keep the Medial Effect ones if they are natural in appearance. And I'd spend all of my time trying to manually get Maximal effects ones.

That's what this post made me think! 80/20 Pareto!

 

[turbin3]

That's what this post made me think! 80/20 Pareto!

There is, I think, a whole lot of truth in that. The way I've looked at it over the years is, with all of the different types of factors that contribute to link value, and ranking factors, that they have a value "modifier" associated with them. I'm not saying that's the case, it's just my own belief. What I mean by that is, I like to look at link value, ranking factors, etc. as each individual one having some undefined value. Lets just call that value "100". Whatever the maximum value is that Google has decided to give a particular ranking factor, is "100". It's anyone's guess what that 100% is. Over the years, as the algorithm and ranking factors are adjusted, certain factors or types of links possibly devalued, that value modifier decreases. So maybe a particular type of link that was worth 100% of it's total possible value previously, might now only be worth 50%, 25%, maybe even just 1% of what it was before. It would make a lot of sense to me that they would go this sort of route. See the industry abusing a particular type of link or ranking factor to no end? No problem. Adjust that algorithm and reduce 50% or 99% of it's possible value so that a lot of people end up wasting their time. There are far more experienced and knowledgeable people here that will have a better read on whether this theory holds any water.

For me, I think it makes sense and helps me keep things in perspective. Like, for example, EMDs. If I'm looking to acquire a domain, start a particular site, the question probably comes up. EMD or not? "Everyone" says EMDs are dead. Others say they still work just fine. Obviously there are a lot of people here that know the truth isn't so black or white. I look at it from the standpoint of, maybe that particular factor is now only worth 5% or 10% or whatever (arbitrary numbers) of what it used to be. That may or may not be worth my time. If all of the other SEO and on/off page factors are falling in line and adding up perfectly, hey maybe having that EMD is not a factor that demands significant focus. Maybe a niche has extreme competition though, and maybe you need to squeeze that last few percent of "performance" out of your marketing strategy. In that regard, I look at it a lot like performance optimization for a sports car. Do I drop some weight off of the car, do I upgrade turbos, maybe it's suspension/brakes/chassis that needs work. Maybe it's not the nuts and bolts, and in some cases just the cosmetic appearance needs work. Assess those factors, see what you can squeeze out of them, all with keeping an eye on which of those factors do or do not fit your budget, time or other constraints.