A New Domain Buying Metric/notation is needed - Your thoughts???

24 replies
  • SEO
  • |
I've gotten A LOT of PMs this week about evaluating domains for PBns and buying links using DA PA and pagerank etc. Its obvious there is STILL a lot of confusion out there. I use some of Moz's stuff and Majestic but I find that no matter how often we say that we use them just to filter the domains to check the backlinks for - people get confused and take the metrics as indications to buy without checking the backlinks. I think as long as we talk about these metrics people will still think they mean something on their own. Seems to me we need something else thats directly about the links.

So it got us to thinking - why not just use a simple notation that actually relates to the links pointing to the domain not just some single number representing what Moz or Majestics or even Ahrefs thinks about the whole domain. Wouldn't that save a whole lot of time? Isn't it kind of crazy that we are all running backlink checks on the same domains every day to get the exact same information?

anyway What I settled on for our new way of listing metrics isn't a new crawler metric its just something that I wish would catch on and we will begin to use with our clients. Nothing that revolutionary here -

When evaluating a domain, for now at least, people still look at the PR of incoming links (I use PA also but still look at PR too) even though pagerank itself has not been updated for a year. Mind you I don't go by pagerank stated for a domain (yes I know its PAGE rank but domain buyers know what I mean and thats how it is referred to) BUT as long as Google continues to update PR even once a year it s is unlikely that all the PR links or even most PR links to a domain are way off. Time will tell on that.

Okay so the first thing I think everyone looks for is how many pr links are there? That is - How many PR2 links (to start low), How many pr3s, how many PR4s and Pr5s etc. Its amazing how you can find domains with high metrics that when you check the backlinks all you see is a bunch of PR1s and PR2 links. So if we could just get that data quick it would be a HUGE time saver. Some Domain sellers already do and it looks like this

Domain.com 0 PR9 0 PR8 0 PR7 3 PR6 4 PR5 7 PR4 12 PR3 27 PR2 57 PR1

usually placed in a table.

Thats fine and works of course but, man thats tedious and bulky to write out or put in a table, especially if you are looking at multiple domains and thats just pagreank link counts and nothing else. So if you are showing someone a domain or talking about one here in the forum you would have to type that all out or put up a screenshot of a table. Yuck for waste of time. this is the same thing without a table or repeating "PR" - just putting a space.

0 0 0 3 4 7 12 27 57

then you could add referring domains. lets say there are 75 referring domains

0 0 0 3 4 7 12 27 57 D75

Boom. Done son. I am sorry thats ten times more useful to me at least than mozrank, pagerank or trustflow. IF you are new and not used to this then it looks cryptic without the explanation each time of "PR" but If I had that on auctions/dropped or expiring domains and it only reported followed links domain research woud be a snap AND FAST. I'd have to run my backlink checker like ten times less and that almost bar code looking notation is a lot more reliable and harder to game. I'd only run the backlink checker for the ones I really am interested in to see the OBL (number of outbound links on the link source page) and the placement of those links. Shucks my backlink checkers could breeze through in a second or two because they wouldn't need to query Google for PR (but I'd still on an expensive domain do it to double check).

Of course newbies would say what the ----- is that? but once its explained in about five seconds they are good to go. Finally and probably most importantly - newbies who insist on getting this notation would put an end to the bogus domain sellers popping up that are selling based just on Metrics that really don't give enough real data.

So you bought a PR4 with a DA of 35 and a trustflow of 22. Experienced domain buyers know that could still be a drop down crappy domain not even worth registration fees. right now all these metrics don't give you much real data at all. tjhe above notation gives you 70% of all you will need and 100% of what you need to pass running a backlink check on.

Whats your thoughts??? We are looking to add even more to this system to give even more real data, (like a CH in the code would indicate mostly chinese anchor text - now that would be another great time saver!! ). These are all things Majetic and Moz don't supply because they are domain buying specific.
#buying #domain #needed #notation #thoughts
  • Profile picture of the author Icematikx
    Why not take the big three's metrics (OSE, AHREFS and Majestic), combine that with the actual page rank (not domain rank), and factor in MozTrust and Majestic Trust. Filter out all nofollow backlinks from the equation and produce statistics purely based on dofollow links.

    Probably impossible. There must be a way to automatically extract data from the big three, remove all nofollow links and then compute a rating out of 100 for the domain.
    Signature

    Just got back from a #BrightonSEO. I was given room 404 in the hotel I stayed at. Couldn’t find it anywhere!

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9540038].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author nik0
      Banned
      Originally Posted by Icematikx View Post

      Why not take the big three's metrics (OSE, AHREFS and Majestic), combine that with the actual page rank (not domain rank), and factor in MozTrust and Majestic Trust. Filter out all nofollow backlinks from the equation and produce statistics purely based on dofollow links.

      Probably impossible. There must be a way to automatically extract data from the big three, remove all nofollow links and then compute a rating out of 100 for the domain.
      You can combine it all but that would still serve little purpose as PR remains the one and only important factor.

      Eg:

      DA40
      PA48
      TF30
      CF25
      MozRank 4.2
      MozTrust 4.5
      300PR0 50PR1 10PR2 0PR3 0PR4 0PR5 0PR6 0PR7 0PR8 0PR9 0PR10

      When you combine all that it would look like a damn strong domain, while all experienced domain sourcers would known in an instant that it's most likely a heavily spammed / worthless domain that turns out as a PR2 at best or maybe a weak PR3.

      That's the whole point of this thread, all these metrics mean totally nothing, and the only purpose it serves is some pre-filtering of domains.

      PR/OBL are still the only reliable metrics so yeah a service that would provide that would be pretty valuable. Good luck setting it up, I would definitely be a client
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9540865].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
        Originally Posted by nik0 View Post

        DA40
        PA48
        TF30
        CF25
        MozRank 4.2
        MozTrust 4.5
        300PR0 50PR1 10PR2 0PR3 0PR4 0PR5 0PR6 0PR7 0PR8 0PR9 0PR10
        You nailed it. When you look at those lines the only one that gives you any real information and actually overrides everything else is the last line which is my point
        Signature

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9542513].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author SEOWizard417
    I usually set a minimum DA, PR, linking root domains to filter than go through any remaining domains manually. You have to check their back link profiles to really get a good idea on a domain's value. You can usually snuff out the inflated/spammy domains with high metrics by looking over anchor texts and number of back links.

    Going by just PR can be bad as it hasn't been updated in so long. You may think a domain has a certain PR when it's actually much lower.
    Signature
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9542784].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author SEOMasters
    Just did a 301 with a PR5 domain to a page, no high DA/PA/TF/CF/Moz metrics.
    Keyword went to page 1 in 24 hours
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9542968].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author paulgl
      Never heard this mentioned before.

      How about the good old fashioned smell test?

      Does it pass the smell test?

      If it doesn't pass the smell test, and any metric you use says it's
      golden, then what?

      Or are you implying that you are only talking about domains that have
      already passed the smell test?

      I've always been a man of caution and skepticism. But I go for domains I
      can "use," as opposed to "abuse." (No I don't really mean abuse in the true
      sense of the word.)

      Different metrics for different uses?

      The reason why I brought up "the smell test," is that loads of people
      come here, posting threads that are in effect, "Does this domain pass
      the smell test?" Then everyone piles on their opinion.

      Paul
      Signature

      If you were disappointed in your results today, lower your standards tomorrow.

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9543047].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author jkgultimate
        Originally Posted by paulgl View Post

        Never heard this mentioned before.

        How about the good old fashioned smell test?

        Does it pass the smell test?

        If it doesn't pass the smell test, and any metric you use says it's
        golden, then what?

        Or are you implying that you are only talking about domains that have
        already passed the smell test?

        I've always been a man of caution and skepticism. But I go for domains I
        can "use," as opposed to "abuse." (No I don't really mean abuse in the true
        sense of the word.)

        Different metrics for different uses?

        The reason why I brought up "the smell test," is that loads of people
        come here, posting threads that are in effect, "Does this domain pass
        the smell test?" Then everyone piles on their opinion.

        Paul
        Hey Paul, what is the "SMELL" test? Explain please.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9543306].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author danparks
          Originally Posted by jkgultimate View Post

          Hey Paul, what is the "SMELL" test? Explain please.
          "Smell test" is a generic term. It isn't something just for SEO. In short, it refers to looking at something and just instinctively knowing that something isn't quite right. Maybe you can't *prove* it's wrong, but you just know it is wrong. Like pulling a pack of lunch meat from the fridge. The "expire date" or "use by date" says you have a few days left to eat it. But it smells bad. You don't care what the package says, if it fails the "smell test" you aren't going to eat it!
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9543962].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
          Originally Posted by jkgultimate View Post

          Hey Paul, what is the "SMELL" test? Explain please.
          I'd bet money you will never get a reasonable answer. its just one of Paul's almost meaningless rants.
          Signature

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9543989].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author domainingin
            Hi,
            There will be no way to exclude a manual check of each domain before using it for your PBN or money site and focussing on PR / PA / DA / MR / CF is dangerous, as those metrics can be faked easily with a few $5 spammy link blasts and have no power when it comes to getting higher Google rankings and you're setting yourself up to get scammed!

            However, we have worked for a long time now with the Majestic CF/TF ratio and if looking at a number or ratio, we have found this ratio reliable and one we could focus on, to quickly filter out SPAMMY, low quality domains is the first step:

            The MajesticSEO Citation Flow (CF) / Trust Flow (TF) ratio is impossible to manipulate with SPAM!



            While SPAM will increase CF, it is very hard to manipulate TF using low quality links, as a domain that has high PA/DA will likely have high Citation Flow, but it's Trust Flow will depend entirely on the quality of the links.

            Some basics:
            Majestic found the top 25% of domains had CF/TF ratios near 1.09. An average site had a CF/TF ratio near 2.89.
            But spammy domains had ratios between 6.58 and 9.87!

            The closer the CF/TF ratio was to zero, the better the URL!
            We make sure the CF/TF ratio of our domains is near 1.8. If it's anywhere above that, we don't use, buy or sell the domain.

            The point is in Mike's thread title "a new Metric notation is needed"

            While one can not rely 100% on hard numbers when searching for high quality domains,
            the CF / TF ratio is in my and others opinion the fastest way to quickly filter out low quality, spammy domains.

            Have a good day!
            Dan
            Signature

            Links and Majestic TF are what Pass Authority and Rankings NOT PR / DA or PA!
            Domain Scraper and FREE Majestic metrics now available in ONE-Day-Trial of DomainMetricsTool
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9568143].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Jayski32
              Originally Posted by domainingin View Post

              Hi,
              There will be no way to exclude a manual check of each domain before using it for your PBN or money site and focussing on PR / PA / DA / MR / CF is dangerous, as those metrics can be faked easily with a few $5 spammy link blasts and have no power when it comes to getting higher Google rankings and you're setting yourself up to get scammed!

              However, we have worked for a long time now with the Majestic CF/TF ratio and if looking at a number or ratio, we have found this ratio reliable and one we could focus on, to quickly filter out SPAMMY, low quality domains is the first step:

              The MajesticSEO Citation Flow (CF) / Trust Flow (TF) ratio is impossible to manipulate with SPAM!



              While SPAM will increase CF, it is very hard to manipulate TF using low quality links, as a domain that has high PA/DA will likely have high Citation Flow, but it’s Trust Flow will depend entirely on the quality of the links.

              Some basics:
              Majestic found the top 25% of domains had CF/TF ratios near 1.09. An average site had a CF/TF ratio near 2.89.
              But spammy domains had ratios between 6.58 and 9.87!

              The closer the CF/TF ratio was to zero, the better the URL!
              We make sure the CF/TF ratio of our domains is near 1.8. If it's anywhere above that, we don't use, buy or sell the domain.

              The point is in Mike's thread title "a new Metric notation is needed"

              While one can not rely 100% on hard numbers when searching for high quality domains,
              the CF / TF ratio is in my and others opinion the fastest way to quickly filter out low quality, spammy domains.

              Have a good day!
              Dan

              I also much prefer TF/CF but TF CAN BE MANIPULATED. TF can go apeshit over some link types, which is why you can get alot of shitty domains chasing TF 20+. To clarify 20+ Tf is a good sign but you still need more due dilligence.
              Signature

              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9568346].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author danparks
              Originally Posted by domainingin View Post

              The closer the CF/TF ratio was to zero, the better the URL!
              We make sure the CF/TF ratio of our domains is near 1.8. If it's anywhere above that, we don't use, buy or sell the domain.
              Do you have some minimum CF that you have found to be acceptable? A very low CF and very low TF would give a very low ratio. Llike CF=1, TF=1 would give a ratio of 1.00, which even though is close to "ideal," obviously wouldn't be good in this case.
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9568603].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author MikeFriedman
              Originally Posted by domainingin View Post

              it is very hard to manipulate TF using low quality links,
              Definitely not entirely true. I've run a few tests where I spammed the bejesus out of brand new domains. I'm seeing TF's hit 20-35 on them so far.
              Signature
              Get the TIPS and STRATEGIES I use to HELP businesses GROW through SEO.
              Delivered to you each week!

              >>> Sign Up Now <<<
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9568718].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
              Originally Posted by domainingin View Post

              The MajesticSEO Citation Flow (CF) / Trust Flow (TF) ratio is impossible to manipulate with SPAM!
              Trustflow is off quite frequently. You are over rating spam. There are a lot of domains (I would say most) that have no spam but still are not worth a hill of beans. So its not all about spam. Yes I do think that generally Trustflow is more resistant to spam but thats not to say its accurate either.

              One of the things that almost all non google metrics do poorly is calculate internal juice flow, I find trustflow is often thrown off by a crappy link resource page on a good domain/home page. There are almost every day high trustflow and great cf/tf ratio domains available that have nothing but some PR1s and Pr2s pointing at them and in many cases are not worth registration fees.
              Signature

              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9570006].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author domainingin
                Trustflow is off quite frequently. You are over rating spam. There are a lot of domains (I would say most) that have no spam but still are not worth a hill of beans. So its not all about spam. Yes I do think that generally Trustflow is more resistant to spam but thats not to say its accurate either.
                You are right re above and I personally anyway check backlinks as they are responsible for the link juice.

                One of the things that almost all non google metrics do poorly is calculate internal juice flow, I find trustflow is often thrown off by a crappy link resource page on a good domain/home page. There are almost every day high trustflow and great cf/tf ratio domains available that have nothing but some PR1s and Pr2s pointing at them and in many cases are not worth registration fees.
                And that is evidently true!

                But most of the people just check DA/PA and PR when buying domains so wanted to see if there is at least a parameter for the 1st check, that is more reliable.

                Cheers
                Dan
                Signature

                Links and Majestic TF are what Pass Authority and Rankings NOT PR / DA or PA!
                Domain Scraper and FREE Majestic metrics now available in ONE-Day-Trial of DomainMetricsTool
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9570150].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Kevin Maguire
    PR checkers themselves are not the best. Would really need to be in-house. A lot of checkers around can only check folders with /

    Everything else it returns PR N/A

    A lot of these checkers don't pick up on that, not counting links on .index .html etc etc...
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9543149].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author RobLowe
    This is pretty deep stuff. It looks like SEP Masters is having good results, I'd like to hear more.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9568182].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author deezn
    Wait, so Mike, are you developing a system to do so? Is there something out there already that does this? It would be mightily useful. It eliminates one step in my opinion. Once the general metrics check out, then you go and look at the links. If there are a ton of PR0 and PR1 links some might just skip that. But this metric will help you quickly eliminate a bunch of domains you would never buy and narrow/whittle down the list.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9568235].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Jayski32
    I am for anything that would stop the DA obsession and anything MOZ related. I hate that company and their shitty metrics so much it hurts.
    Signature

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9568340].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author godoveryou
    All of these metrics on their own or even collectively suck.

    Mike, your idea is the closest thing to pointing how I buy domains which is largely based on the number of inbound links (that aren't spam, footer, blogroll.)

    I know I'm going to catch hell for this but....

    ... it's tiered link building. Instead of using a parasite, you're using an actual domain. But the domains which yield the best effects on the SERPS for me are those that have thousands of legitimate links.

    That having been said, of course I prefer links from pages with PR/PA.

    None the less...

    Edit In: Just to clarify - I don't look for a bunch of low quality links and get excited just because there's a lot of links. More that I get excited when I see 720 Pr1's, 153 pr2's, 74 Pr3's, etc.... Even if the Domain is just a PR3 but has links like this, I'm a buyer.
    Signature
    Don't Know Me? - Read my interview at Matthewwoodward.co.uk
    http://www.godoveryou.com/
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9568727].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author MikeFriedman
      Originally Posted by godoveryou View Post

      Edit In: Just to clarify - I don't look for a bunch of low quality links and get excited just because there's a lot of links. More that I get excited when I see 720 Pr1's, 153 pr2's, 74 Pr3's, etc.... Even if the Domain is just a PR3 but has links like this, I'm a buyer.
      I think that is what a lot of people miss. Generally, you are not trying to rank a private network site, so the quality of the links is not a huge deal. I'm just trying to siphon and re-purpose the PR to suit my needs. I'm more worried about the staying power of the links than anything. If it is nothing but site-wide blogroll links, for example, no thanks. Those are too easy to lose.
      Signature
      Get the TIPS and STRATEGIES I use to HELP businesses GROW through SEO.
      Delivered to you each week!

      >>> Sign Up Now <<<
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9568844].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author domainingin
        @danparks
        We have found minimum CF around 15, but Majestic did a great study on this:
        The Ratio of Majestic SEO's Citation to Trust Flow as an Indicator of Profile Quality - Majestic SEO Blog

        @Mike Friedman
        Not very sure how you could spam a domain with quality authority links?
        Would like to see the procedure you are using.

        Cheers
        Dan
        Signature

        Links and Majestic TF are what Pass Authority and Rankings NOT PR / DA or PA!
        Domain Scraper and FREE Majestic metrics now available in ONE-Day-Trial of DomainMetricsTool
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9568880].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author MikeFriedman
          Originally Posted by domainingin View Post


          @Mike Friedman
          Not very sure how you could spam a domain with quality authority links? I would like to see the procedure you are using.

          Cheers
          Dan
          That's the thing. I'm not using any quality links. GSA with basically no filters.
          Signature
          Get the TIPS and STRATEGIES I use to HELP businesses GROW through SEO.
          Delivered to you each week!

          >>> Sign Up Now <<<
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9568942].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author domainingin
            @Mike Friedman
            That's the thing. I'm not using any quality links. GSA with basically no filters.
            Sure, that's possible, but in general Mike A. started the thread with the question to find a new metric notation, so I just write about our experience with the CF/TF ratio as a 1st step marker to filter out SPAMMY domains, which extremely saves time as you don't spend time analyzing all that crappy domains with manual check, which is always mandatory.

            If you do a manual check on this random domains, you will see that the one with CF/TF ratio of 3.33 at the non www. version is SPAMMY:


            (one of the above domains is quite ok, but has 2 drops)

            Cheers
            Dan
            Signature

            Links and Majestic TF are what Pass Authority and Rankings NOT PR / DA or PA!
            Domain Scraper and FREE Majestic metrics now available in ONE-Day-Trial of DomainMetricsTool
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9569656].message }}

Trending Topics