Backlink Relevancy Does Not Matter! Agree or Disagree?

[thomarv29]

Just wanting to get peoples opinions on Backlink Relevancy

[dburk]

Hi thomarv29,

A backlink does not directly help you rank in the SERP unless it is relevant.


Of course, as someone who refers to themselves as "Supreme SEO Chanchelor", you already knew that, right?


An irrelevant backlink can pass link juice but does not directly help you rank for anything relevant until after you pass that link juice through relevant anchor text.

And for those of you who are not sure what a relevant backlink is, in the eyes of search engines, it is a backlink that includes relevant keywords in or near the anchor text of the backlink.

[tamarindcandy]

Yes, relevancy matters. Sheesh.

[Jeremy Banks]

I think it does matter, but it's not like a backlink from a completely irrelevant page is useless

I think of it like this

• backlink from relevant site worth 1 point
• backlink from not relevant site worth .75 points

Google just likes the relevant ones more IMO no proof to back that up. I test a lot and I find any backlink is a good backlink

[TaYou]

Certainly relevancy matters. It's all about giving surfers
what they're expecting or looking for.

[imback]

Relevancy is something Google directly says it likes. I dont care who says what my SEO is always strong and I trust follow the rules they make.


CHAD

[hokkienmee]

will inrelevant affect SEO???

[imback]

They have not said that directly, but it could...I do mostly manual links so I never have a problem. Maybe someone who has a lot of "inrelevant" links could answer that.


CHAD

[DavidG]

Being relevent is safer.


regZ

[jacked]

It does make a difference, and can be very powerful tool, but its not as great as many people blow it up to be.

[JSProjects]

Originally Posted by Jeremy Banks

I think it does matter, but it's not like a backlink from a completely irrelevant page is useless

I think of it like this

• backlink from relevant site worth 1 point
• backlink from not relevant site worth .75 points

Google just likes the relevant ones more IMO no proof to back that up. I test a lot and I find any backlink is a good backlink

Agree. I think it does help a little. But not as much as people think.

[imback]

or it could help more than other think...just mu opinion, but if you follow Google's blog you can never go wrong.


CHAD

[dburk]

Originally Posted by Jeremy Banks

I think it does matter, but it's not like a backlink from a completely irrelevant page is useless

I think of it like this

• backlink from relevant site worth 1 point
• backlink from not relevant site worth .75 points

Google just likes the relevant ones more IMO no proof to back that up. I test a lot and I find any backlink is a good backlink

Hi Jeremy,

Relevancy isn't determined at the site level by search engines, it is at the page level, and for backlinks it is weighted primarily toward the text in or near the anchor of a backlink.

If your backlink is completely irrelevant to your targeted keyword it will have no direct ranking power. It only helps you to rank if, at some point, you channel that link juice through a relevant anchor text.

A relevant backlink could be anywhere from 17% to infinitely more powerful than an irrelevant backlink. The 17% is derived from the approximate damping factor of an optimized doorway page, which by the way is a violation of Google's Webmaster Guidelines. In typical applications, an irrelevant backlink would generally have less than 20% of the ranking power of a relevant backlink, assuming that the link juice is channeled through relevant anchor text within an internal link. Without the subsequent channeling of link juice through a relevant anchor text link it has no ranking influence.