JUST THE FACTS thread - Google's algorithm change

[Mike Anthony]

Lots of thread flying around the place with suppositions and unconfirmed theories and there will probably be even more threads so I am going to take the time and this thread to pass on real news on the algo. It will be either real data or news from those in a position to know whats in the algo.

PLEASE FEEL FREE TO DISCUSS AND GIVE YOUR TAKE IN REGARD TO THE FACTS AND NEWS. I'm going to post the news but by no means am I trying to squelch discussion.

First this weekends interview with Google's Singhai

http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2011/02/...d-spam-issues/

Notable quote

"Singhal did say that the company added numerous “signals,” or factors it would incorporate into its algorithm for ranking sites. Among those signals are “how users interact with” a site. Google has said previously that, among other things, it often measures whether users click the “back” button quickly after visiting a search result, which might indicate a lack of satisfaction with the site.

So if that is true the quality of your site is even more so now a SEO FACTOR If people leave quick then its a hit on your ranking

Singhai also states that they are using human focus groups and asking them questions of some results

These “human raters” are asked to look at results for certain search queries and questions such as, “Would you give your credit card number to this site?” and “Would you take medical advice for your children from those sites,

The first extensive data test are in from Sistrik and the losers are shown

Google Farmer Update: Quest for Quality - SEO-Blog

We all knew about ezinearticles but they list 24 others. Got to hand it to them. theres a lot of site on that list I wouldn't trust the content from. Unfortunately that seems to have some parrallel with how much marketers use them.

winners? see link below

Number Crunchers: Who Lost In Google’s “Farmer” Algorithm Change?

Basically the rich just got richer. top name brand sites did well.


Will update as more real numbers and data comes in.

[Mike Anthony]

reserved for updates.

[GeorgR.]

THIS *finally* answers a question i pondered recently.

Because i was wondering whether to remove my navbar and categories, recent posts etc. to replace with an AdSense block.

Now i know not to do this...

[Mike Anthony]

Originally Posted by GeorgR.

THIS *finally* answers a question i pondered recently.

Because i was wondering whether to remove my navbar and categories, recent posts etc. to replace with an AdSense block.

Now i know not to do this...

Has a ring of truth to it doesn't it I know I hit reverse when I hit an ezinearticle while searching for content. Still the The ironic thing about it is Nothing turns me off more than a site with a lot of adsense - owned by google. I'm not alone. Google using how a site feels is funny because adsense makes be hit that same back button.

[Fernando Veloso]

Originally Posted by GeorgR.

THIS *finally* answers a question i pondered recently.

Because i was wondering whether to remove my navbar and categories, recent posts etc. to replace with an AdSense block.

Now i know not to do this...

Why is that George?

Do you really believe Google will drop his mater money machine?

Edit to add:

I have to be honest here. I believe this is just another marketing stunt as the previous ones. It's a cycle.

Now they hit THIS... next time they'll hit THERE.

Getting common.

[GeorgR.]

Sorry, was not clear.

On that one site i already have Adsense on it - but i was thinking about removing "distracting" elements for the sake of a higher CTR.

Eg...if people click on a nav-bar...they wont click on an Ad.

BUT..of course it would at the same time skyrocket your bounce-rate and reduce perceived (and real) website experience for the user.

If a visitor comes to your site...its actually a good thing they can navigate, check out other posts etc...instead of ONLY having ads to click at.

What i did, i moved the MAIN nav bar down to the footer (with contact us, terms, privacy etc.) since i thought this was indeed distracting and there was no reason to display those prominently on the blog.

But definitely leave the other stuff on the right so people can check out other posts and categories. Aka "provide an experience" and try to keep people on the site - DESPITE that i have some ads on it.

[Fernando Veloso]

Know what I learned along the way? Diversity is the key to work WITH Google.

Imagine I run 200 sites. I keep them all in different "strategy boxes". Even when I know something is working with Google, I keep some sites OUTSIDE that "box". Why? Cause I know next update will reserve everything and sites doing what was working will get penalized and vice versa.

Call me crazy but this is what I've been doing. A major plus is this method keeps me free to do what is important without spending ALL MY TIME chasing new tricks and what not.

As I said above, personally this is just marketing, business. Google needs to kick some ass's from time to time.

@MIke, sorry about the "offtopic" with no factual data.

[thebitbotdotcom]

HA! I KNEW IT! BOUNCE RATE DOES MATTER!

Cutts said it didn't and that they didn't use it. Well, it sure sounds to me like they do!

[Mike Anthony]

Originally Posted by Fernando Veloso

@MIke, sorry about the "offtopic" with no factual data.

No. No . I don't mean to say people can't discuss things. its just that in the first two posts I am going to put just facts. So please feel free to discuss. I'll fix that in the OP

[GeorgR.]

Originally Posted by thebitbotdotcom

HA! I KNEW IT! BOUNCE RATE DOES MATTER!

Cutts said it didn't and that they didn't use it. Well, it sure sounds to me like they do!

who cares whether it matters to Google?

It should matter to you. If you see on your stats that the avg. time a visitor is on your site is 3 seconds....it's time to think over some things.

[aygabtu]

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

Lots of thread flying around the place with suppositions and unconfirmed theories and there will probably be even more threads so I am going to take the time and this thread to pass on real news on the algo. It will be either real data or news from those in a position to know whats in the algo.

PLEASE FEEL FREE TO DISCUSS AND GIVE YOUR TAKE IN REGARD TO THE FACTS AND NEWS. I'm going to post the news but by no means am I trying to squelch discussion.

First this weekends interview with Google's Singhai

Google

Notable quote

So if that is true the quality of your site is even more so now a SEO FACTOR If people leave quick then its a hit on your ranking

Singhai also states that they are using human focus groups and asking them questions of some results

The first extensive data test are in from Sistrik and the losers are shown

Google Farmer Update: Quest for Quality - SEO-Blog

We all knew about ezinearticles but they list 24 others. Got to hand it to them. theres a lot of site on that list I wouldn't trust the content from. Unfortunately that seems to have some parrallel with how much marketers use them.

winners? see link below

Number Crunchers: Who Lost In Google’s “Farmer” Algorithm Change?

Basically the rich just got richer. top name brand sites did well.


Will update as more real numbers and data comes in.

I hope they start ranking sites more on usage. My site has a 10% bounce rate, 48 minute Avg time on site, and 25 page views per visitor. I doubt my competition even comes close to that. This is from google analytics. Alexa shows a totally different story, but google's number matter more, especially to google. Come on Google, move me to #1!

[noble]

It seems it basically is applying to the big sites out there where articles/content is being slapped together fast just to target as many keywords as possible.

[thebitbotdotcom]

Originally Posted by GeorgR.

who cares whether it matters to Google?

It should matter to you. If you see on your stats that the avg. time a visitor is on your site is 3 seconds....it's time to think over some things.

I didn't say that because I had assumed that it would be obvious to everybody already...

[BenJackson]

This for compiling everything in this thread Mike. I thought I'd share my experiment here...

Something that content farms often do is abuse Adsense. I did a little test to see if I could find some sort of correlation between the use of Adsense and some of the sites that were most negatively affected by the algo change. I wanted to see if sites that linked out more to ads than real sites got hit for it.

"...parts of our system encourage links to good sites."

-Matt Cutts

"...good pages seldom point to bad ones"

-http://www.vldb.org/conf/2004/RS15P3.PDF (TrustRank)

The ads don't necessarily lead to bad sites. Quite contrarily, they often lead to authoritative pages. I bring this up simply to point out the fact that Google uses your outbound links as a factor when ranking your site. So, if content farms typically have a larger percentage of outbound links that are ads, it is plausible that Google might have started using this as a measurement in their algorithm.

I took a random sample of 5 article pages from each of these sites and measured their adsense links to OBL (outbound link) ratio as well their adsense to overall links ratio. Here's what I found:

(In order of most negatively effected by the update to least)

Suite101.com - Change: -94%

Ad Links/Total Links = 14.5%
Ad Links/Outbound Links = 54.14%

Answerbag.com - Change: -91%

Ad Links/Total Links = 11.72%
Ad Links/Outbound Links = 60%

Buzzle.com - Change: -85%

Ad Links/Total Links = 21.79%
Ad Links/Outbound Links = 92.42%

Wisegeek.com - Change: -77%

Ad Links/Total Links = 15.93%
Ad Links/Outbound Links = 67%

And here's what I found for Ehow...

Ad Links/Total Links = 10.28%
Ad Links/Outbound Links = 38.83%

The samples were relatively small (hardly empirical), and the data didn't quite correlate to my hypothesis as much as I had hoped. However, in the test I conducted, Ehow's Ad Links/Outbound Links ratio is noticeably lower than the other sites'. This leads me to believe that one of the ways Google tried to target content farms is by cracking down on sites who mostly link out with ads.

What do you guys think??

P.S. I couldn't get SEO Quake to measure the links on articlebase or ezine or I definitely would have used them

[inter123]

How reliable is the data from Sistrix? Have they got their statistics right or are they just a PR arm of various companies?

[gearmonkey]

Yahoo Answers is doing very well since the update. I'd be interested in seeing their Ad Links/Total Links, Ad Links/Outbound Links data

[BenJackson]

Originally Posted by gearmonkey

Yahoo Answers is doing very well since the update. I'd be interested in seeing their Ad Links/Total Links, Ad Links/Outbound Links data

Just from a quick look I can tell that their Ad Links/OBLs is very low -> there are three adsense links and one adsense image on each page. I did one page (a resolved Q) and their Links/OBLs ratio was only 12.12%.

[TZ]

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

Notable quote

So if that is true the quality of your site is even more so now a SEO FACTOR If people leave quick then its a hit on your ranking

Translation = Bounce Rate

Bounce Rate = A big deal in the future of all SE algos.

[gearmonkey]

Originally Posted by TZ

Translation = Bounce Rate

Bounce Rate = A big deal in the future of all SE algos.

Bounce rate is something that could easily be manipulated. Probably as simple as a scrapebox extension and free proxies.

[TZ]

Originally Posted by gearmonkey

Bounce rate is something that could easily be manipulated. Probably as simple as a scrapebox extension and free proxies.

Google can see Proxy requests.

I disagree. Google can see this kind of manipulation as clear as a bell.

I believe bounce rate is having a big effect. I know out of all our blogs, the one with the smallest bounce rate is doing the best this week. Don't know if that is WHY it's doing so well - just wondering at this point.

[Mike Grant]

Do you know how to overcome the bounce rate factor? Stop using Google Analytics, problem solved.

I never understood why anyone uses GA on their money sites. It can do nothing but harm your sites, especially when there are better analytics programs available.

[WareTime]

Originally Posted by mgtarheels

Do you know how to overcome the bounce rate factor? Stop using Google Analytics, problem solved.

I never understood why anyone uses GA on their money sites. It can do nothing but harm your sites, especially when there are better analytics programs available.

Probably a little truth to that. Otoh, how many have Google toolbar installed which no doubt tracks things as well Interesting that most of the sites that tanked are gamed by IM'ers. What's that tell you?

[Mike Anthony]

Originally Posted by mgtarheels

Do you know how to overcome the bounce rate factor? Stop using Google Analytics, problem solved.

Nope. they can still track millions of people logged on as they click through various results to determine if people have found what they are looking for on any result link.

[Mike Grant]

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

Nope. they can still track millions of people logged on as they click through various results to determine if people have found what they are looking for on any result link.

Unless you have GA installed or your visitor has the toolbar installed, they cannot track your bounce rate.

[cryptone24]

I just checked the avg. time on a new site of mine (less than 2 months) and its showing 00:04:23 through google analytics.

Don't know if thats good or bad, seems good to me.

I also try to write really long posts with lots of useful information, plenty of inner links and throw in a you tube video, it increase time spent on site.

I also use allot of bullet points, break the information neatly. NO ADS for the first 2 months, just pure content.

The posts that are getting allot of hits, i may look to optimize with some text links, but not too many banners.

THIS IS MY STRATEGY FOR 2011.

[Mike Anthony]

Originally Posted by mgtarheels

Unless you have GA installed or your visitor has the toolbar installed, they cannot track your bounce rate.

You are missing the point. They can track every user that is logged in (usually logged in because of Igoogle or gmail) using their search engine . Thats how they can give personalized search results. No GA is required and no toolbar. They cannot get your direct bounce rate but they can track that the users chose another link in the search results which is all they need to determine how long someone stayed at a previous link. Its practically the same as a bounce rate most of the time.

Servers can time stamp almost everything so its data they have right in front of them and its a top candidate for determining how useful a search result was. If you find what you are looking for after being served a link then you are not going to be coming back to google immediately to have another link served. I know I rarely stay at an ezineartilce article. I am right back clicking on the next link on Google.

[markowe]

Originally Posted by mgtarheels

Unless you have GA installed or your visitor has the toolbar installed, they cannot track your bounce rate.

Are you sure? Everyone gets a cookie when they do a Google search - if you click on one search result and then you are back on Google clicking on another link within 10 seconds then that's a bounce, surely?

Anyway, MILLIONS of people have the toolbar installed, that must give them a pretty good indication of visitor behaviour!

[Kurt]

Originally Posted by mgtarheels

Unless you have GA installed or your visitor has the toolbar installed, they cannot track your bounce rate.

All Google needs for bounce rate is your IP address and to track clicks.

Did a searcher with IP 4.4.4 click a link in the SERPs, then IP 4.4.4 click another link in the SERPs just 10-20 seconds, for example, later?

And if you have the Googlebar or use Chrome, they can get tons more info.

[Mike Anthony]

Originally Posted by Kurt

Did a searcher with IP 4.4.4 click a link in the SERPs, then IP 4.4.4 click another link in the SERPs just 10-20 seconds, for example, later?

.

thats right IP, logged in users, toolbars and they could be planning on syncing all of them so that you would have to game all three.

[Mike Grant]

Originally Posted by Kurt

All Google needs for bounce rate is your IP address and to track clicks.

Did a searcher with IP 4.4.4 click a link in the SERPs, then IP 4.4.4 click another link in the SERPs just 10-20 seconds, for example, later?

And if you have the Googlebar or use Chrome, they can get tons more info.

Clicking on multiple links doesn't matter, doesn't signify bounce rate. Many people will open multiple tabs of different pages, or even open one site then google something else in another tab.

[Mike Grant]

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

You are missing the point. They can track every user that is logged in (usually logged in because of Igoogle or gmail) using their search engine . Thats how they can give personalized search results. No GA is required and no toolbar. They cannot get your direct bounce rate but they can track that the users chose another link in the search results which is all they need to determine how long someone stayed at a previous link. Its practically the same as a bounce rate most of the time.

Servers can time stamp almost everything so its data they have right in front of them and its a top candidate for determining how useful a search result was. If you find what you are looking for after being served a link then you are not going to be coming back to google immediately to have another link served. I know I rarely stay at an ezineartilce article. I am right back clicking on the next link on Google.

Nope. Read reply to Kurt.

[Kurt]

Originally Posted by mgtarheels

Clicking on multiple links doesn't matter, doesn't signify bounce rate. Many people will open multiple tabs of different pages, or even open one site then google something else in another tab.

Yes it does show bounce rate for specific search query. If they "google something else" it isn't the same query and in this case wouldn't factor into bounce rate.

If I was the programmer and the user opened multiple URLs at the same time for the same query, I'd simply discount the data and not use it to factor into "bounce rate" stats.

You've given exceptions, but these exceptions are easily taken out of the equation.

[Mike Grant]

Originally Posted by Kurt

Yes it does show bounce rate for specific search query. If they "google something else" it isn't the same query and in this case wouldn't factor into bounce rate.

If I was the programmer and the user opened multiple URLs at the same time for the same query, I'd simply discount the data and not use it to factor into "bounce rate" stats.

You've given exceptions, but these exceptions are easily taken out of the equation.

There is absolutely no difference between clicking on multiple links initially/over time on the same serach or hitting the back button and hitting another.

[Mike Grant]

FWIW, I've tested it on my Adsense sites. Had a pretty high bounce rate, about 60%, and figured that was harming my SERPs. As a test, removed it from 5 sites, all 5 sites increased rankings within two weeks. The other 10 stayed the same. For the 5 that changed positively, I had not done any backlinking/on-page for over a month.

I've to catch a plane, I'll check back when I can.

[Kurt]

Originally Posted by mgtarheels

There is absolutely no difference between clicking on multiple links initially/over time on the same serach or hitting the back button and hitting another.

As I said before, it the links are opened "at the same time" or within a second of each other, you discount the data.

Plus, if the user is using Chrome or the Googlebar, that data is EASILY captured, as Google can tell which tab is active and how many tabs are opened.

Yahoo did a study years ago that showed things like bounce rate and click through rate are better indicators of relevance and quality than any algo they came up with.

Your logic is backwards. Google uses bounce rate. I suggest you figure out how they do it instead of saying they don't or can't.

Now answer this, what percentage of users open multiple tabs? I bet Google knows.

[Mike Anthony]

Originally Posted by mgtarheels

Clicking on multiple links doesn't matter, doesn't signify bounce rate. Many people will open multiple tabs of different pages, or even open one site then google something else in another tab.

Sorry but you are just not thinking it through . Doesn't matter one bit. In order for you to visit a site you click a link and google can time stamp it. If you open multiple browsers at the same time they can tell that as well. So in that case that washes out but for those who don't they can use the data and there are millions of searches done like that each day. In that case no matter what you claim they can use those as bounces rates and theres enough single click sequential searchers to determine user experience patterns.

Googole does not need ot have everyone search one way they just need enough people to use search engines that way and they most surely do.

[Mike Anthony]

Originally Posted by Kurt

Your logic is backwards. Google uses bounce rate. I suggest you figure out how they do it instead of saying they don't or can't.

.

I think its just more soothing to think they can't.

[JasonB]

So, now that it has just been made public, that Google is cracking down on Content Farms (which they already were). "Quality over Quantity", right?.. Are your article marketing efforts going to change any?

Will you no longer submit to EzineArticles or ArticleBase or GoArticles or IdeaMarketers or Buzzle and so-on? Or keep doing so?

Or will those that submit the same article to 3999 directories now change it up and submit a Unique or Spun (80% Uniqueness) article to each of them?

[BenJackson]

Originally Posted by GuruCreation

So, now that it has just been made public, that Google is cracking down on Content Farms (which they already were). "Quality over Quantity", right?.. Are your article marketing efforts going to change any?

Will you no longer submit to EzineArticles or ArticleBase or GoArticles or IdeaMarketers or Buzzle and so-on? Or keep doing so?

Or will those that submit the same article to 3999 directories now change it up and submit a Unique or Spun (80% Uniqueness) article to each of them?

I will still be submitting my articles to ezine and other major article directories. I don't care if my article doesn't show up in the SERPs - webmasters will still go to ezine looking for content to syndicate - these are the people I write for. As for mass submission, I have AMR, it takes a min or two, so why not?

[cryptone24]

Originally Posted by BenJackson

I will still be submitting my articles to ezine and other major article directories. I don't care if my article doesn't show up in the SERPs - webmasters will still go to ezine looking for content to syndicate - these are the people I write for. As for mass submission, I have AMR, it takes a min or two, so why not?

Amen. End of discussion.

[Chris Munch]

Originally Posted by BenJackson

This for compiling everything in this thread Mike. I thought I'd share my experiment here...

Something that content farms often do is abuse Adsense. I did a little test to see if I could find some sort of correlation between the use of Adsense and some of the sites that were most negatively affected by the algo change. I wanted to see if sites that linked out more to ads than real sites got hit for it.

"...parts of our system encourage links to good sites."

-Matt Cutts

"...good pages seldom point to bad ones"

-http://www.vldb.org/conf/2004/RS15P3.PDF (TrustRank)

The ads don't necessarily lead to bad sites. Quite contrarily, they often lead to authoritative pages. I bring this up simply to point out the fact that Google uses your outbound links as a factor when ranking your site. So, if content farms typically have a larger percentage of outbound links that are ads, it is plausible that Google might have started using this as a measurement in their algorithm.

I took a random sample of 5 article pages from each of these sites and measured their adsense links to OBL (outbound link) ratio as well their adsense to overall links ratio. Here's what I found:

(In order of most negatively effected by the update to least)

Suite101.com - Change: -94%

Ad Links/Total Links = 14.5%
Ad Links/Outbound Links = 54.14%

Answerbag.com - Change: -91%

Ad Links/Total Links = 11.72%
Ad Links/Outbound Links = 60%

Buzzle.com - Change: -85%

Ad Links/Total Links = 21.79%
Ad Links/Outbound Links = 92.42%

Wisegeek.com - Change: -77%

Ad Links/Total Links = 15.93%
Ad Links/Outbound Links = 67%

And here's what I found for Ehow...

Ad Links/Total Links = 10.28%
Ad Links/Outbound Links = 38.83%

The samples were relatively small (hardly empirical), and the data didn't quite correlate to my hypothesis as much as I had hoped. However, in the test I conducted, Ehow's Ad Links/Outbound Links ratio is noticeably lower than the other sites'. This leads me to believe that one of the ways Google tried to target content farms is by cracking down on sites who mostly link out with ads.

What do you guys think??

P.S. I couldn't get SEO Quake to measure the links on articlebase or ezine or I definitely would have used them

Nice to see some real research been done by someone

You should also look into:
- number of ad links compared to the amount of content per page
- number of ad units compared to the amount of content per page
- size of ad units compared to the amount of content per page
You could also try including aff. links in this equation.

Certainly I see a potential link between rankings and the the level of advertising. I don't think this was the biggest factor in the update, but it was certainly one.

[Chris Munch]

Originally Posted by BenJackson

I will still be submitting my articles to ezine and other major article directories. I don't care if my article doesn't show up in the SERPs - webmasters will still go to ezine looking for content to syndicate - these are the people I write for. As for mass submission, I have AMR, it takes a min or two, so why not?

If you were hoping the content that people syndicate (i.e copy) from eZine articles would help you, then you may want to look deeper into the recent algo change.

It has been mentioned that Google got better by filtering duplicate content, and there is evidence that this meant 'discounting the links from duplicate content'.

Something to consider anyway and could help explain why article directories got hit so hard - they just had a ton of their backlinks from duplicate content discounted.

[Hortensia]

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

I think its just more soothing to think they can't.

Bounce rate is so easy to manipulate as ... just put some cheeky video on the landing page and people will watch out of curiosity only.

And what about this:

Many times I open up a lot of pages and don't close them for hours. Does that say anything significant?

Of course not...

[jhonsean]

Google normally change its algorithm to perform more effective in search engine.

[Black Hat Cat]

Originally Posted by thebitbotdotcom

HA! I KNEW IT! BOUNCE RATE DOES MATTER!

Cutts said it didn't and that they didn't use it. Well, it sure sounds to me like they do!

Maybe it didn't matter then, but it matters now with the new change. Or maybe it did matter then, but he was lying, in which case how do you know he's not lying now as well?

[gearmonkey]

There's no evidence that bounce rate matters in SERPs. None!

I have 5 websites, the one with the lowest bounce rate (average time on site is 23 seconds) and increased in traffic. None of the content is unique, it's all duplicate.

I can post screen shots if needed.

My high quality site with lots of backlinks (and was an authority is Google) and had a terrific bounce rate has taken a HUGE hit. All the content is 100% unique and eHow quality.

So those who say bounce rate matters in Google SERPs is just flat out wrong.

[Dave Rodman]

Originally Posted by mgtarheels

Do you know how to overcome the bounce rate factor? Stop using Google Analytics, problem solved.

I never understood why anyone uses GA on their money sites. It can do nothing but harm your sites, especially when there are better analytics programs available.

Well, a couple things. Like others have pointed out, you can't really escape it considering the Toolbar and Chrome are widely used.

Second, if I believe that a bad bounce rate adversely effects my site. I would probably believe that a good bounce rate helps my site, so I would want Google to see my bounce rate. Unless your site kinda sucks I guess.

[Chris Munch]

Originally Posted by gearmonkey

So those who say bounce rate matters in Google SERPs is just flat out wrong.

It does matter, its just one of thousands of factors.

Singhal did say that the company added numerous “signals,” or factors it would incorporate into its algorithm for ranking sites. Among those signals are “how users interact with” a site. Google has said previously that, among other things, it often measures whether users click the “back” button quickly after visiting a search result, which might indicate a lack of satisfaction with the site.

Source: wsj.com

If your two sites you are comparing are completely identical then you can make a better conclusion how changing one single metric effects rankings. This is not the case so you can't draw any conclusions from it, other than Bounce Rate is not the most powerful factor in Google's algorithm.

Bounce rate and other user metrics are part of the picture, but there's a lot more too it.

[gearmonkey]

Originally Posted by Chris Munch

It does matter, its just one of thousands of factors.


Source: wsj.com

If your two sites you are comparing are completely identical then you can make a better conclusion how changing one single metric effects rankings. This is not the case so you can't draw any conclusions from it, other than Bounce Rate is not the most powerful factor in Google's algorithm.

Bounce rate and other user metrics are part of the picture, but there's a lot more too it.

My 3 websites in question are in the same niche. The autoblogs with reused content, average user spends approx 15-20 seconds on site, and has very low bounce rate gets out ranked from my rich unique content site with 10s of thousands of page back links, longer visits and better bounce rates (user interaction).

My conclusion is that Google (or the source you are referring to) are lying.

Maybe this is something for future updates, but it's not in effect right now.

[Chris Munch]

Originally Posted by gearmonkey

My 3 websites in question are in the same niche. The autoblogs with reused content, average user spends approx 15-20 seconds on site, and has very low bounce rate gets out ranked from my rich unique content site with 10s of thousands of page back links, longer visits and better bounce rates (user interaction).

My conclusion is that Google (or the source you are referring to) are lying.

Maybe this is something for future updates, but it's not in effect right now.

You are right, Google can't always be trusted with the statements they make.

With the information you have given it doesn't really provide any indication of anything in relation to bounce rate. Maybe you have a more clear picture, but comparing 3 different sites, with different content and many other different variables, it is very hard to get any sort of solid conclusion.

Since your main site also has more backlinks (and presumably higher quality) than the autoblogs, by the same logic you could state that backlinks are also meaningless and Google is lying that backlinks matter.

We know this is not true, so why assume it is true for bounce rate or back button rate?

You have compared 6 variables between the two sites:
- uniqueness of content
- time on site
- number of backlinks
- quality of content
- niche
- bounce rate

There's literally hundreds, if not thousands, of other variables Google uses in its calculation. It is much more likely that some of those other variables explain the difference, and in this situation hold more weight than the 5 variables you have listed. In other words something else about your sites is holding it back and trumping all those other quality indicators.

If you study the other variables and compare them across a wider net of websites, use a regression analysis type approach you will find your answer.

The challenge can be realizing what those other variables are, which takes some good detective work, insightfulness and an ability to be open minded.