PageRank Superstition: 200+ Signals Are Not One Google Juice
There is no hidden Google juice that miraculously determines the ranking in Google’s results like some people still claim. It’s not 1998 anymore.
PageRank vs 200 ranking signals
One day Google disclosed that about 200+ so called “signals” determine your ranking in the search results.
The large number of ranking signals wasn’t very surprising news to me or people who followed search engine optimization news.
It was obvious that you could have a high PageRank and not rank well at all already a year or so earlier.
At the same time you could outrank high PageRank websites with a few considerations put into practice. Also a high PageRank link would in many cases not push a site’s ranking.
Facing the reality of Google’s algorithm
Like Phillip of Google Blogoscoped has aptly summarized it, signals, classifiers and topicality count. Thus it’s not that simple.
You can’t reduce these 200+ signals into one term dubbing it Google juice like search was another Spaceballs movie.
Please read the list of 200 ranking signals compiled by Brian Dean. Do me the favor and quit that oversimplification reinforcing superstition.
Ranking is not about Google PageRank, toolbar Pagerank or the invisible and yet unnamed Google juice.
Times are more complex nowadays. There is a list of ranking factors you should look at.
- It’s not about the PageRank lottery.
- It’s not just about Google juice.
- It’s not about the force some Jedi might master.
We live in a complex world, let’s just face it. I didn’t even mention Universal Search yet in this post.
PageRank is one signal among 200+ while other signals count even more, domain age and history for instance.
Last updated: March 26th, 2018.
* Creative Commons image by Rob Bertholf
site:seo2.0.onreact.com does netscape
Tad you are missing the point of the article
It is not whether a document ranks for a particular term, but whether it is considered to be in the game at all.
PageRank has always been a combination of multiple factors.
So within you infinite SEO 2.0 wisdom, which of the 200 factors is responsible for this page not being in the index
I totally agree with you.
As you are being so open and independant in your views, could you give some hints as to what are (the most important of) those 200+ signals?
Has somebody began to compile a public list of them?
Andy, I might miss the point but you make believe it’s not complex but a matter of Google juice aka internal PageRank. Did you just unsubscribe from my blog? Yesterday I had 492 subscribers, today 491.
I hope I don’t have to agree with everything to be read ;-)
david, I’m more subjective than independent. Check the SEOmoz ranking factors for a good start, Andy has linked them too, I will add the link:
Fiar: You certainly won’t make me start a feud with Andy, a (virtual) friend of mine. He’s a respected SEO expert but also prone to err it seems. This just proves that he is not a robot. You better stick with humor blogging. Btw. Google is a dangerously powerful entity so I advise you be very cautious the Internet giant.
Why even read Andy? He’s just got a mental disease against Google, and he’ll even do stupid search terms to “prove” pages aren’t indexed to fuel his obsession.
As demonstrated above.
Tad, to be honest I didn’t even click on “Google disclosed to the New York Times” link. I don’t care about how to get high page rank. I care about getting high keyword ranking.
I think we should start a new acronym for those who care too much about page rank. How about PRO? Page rank optimiser. I believe those who concerns themselves too much in how to get page rank rather than the real issues of SEO should be called PRO’s rather than SEOs.
david: The NYT article is about ranking in the results, so make sure not to miss it. Andy Beard’s article is about the underlying Google juice or hidden Google PageRank.
Basically I do not want to concentrate on what’s wrong but rather what is right so this post is more of an exception.
It’s crucial though not to limit the current Google algo to a “juice” like term. It’s a plethora of factors whicho have to be looked at as seperate not molded into one.
The most important ones nowadays, also from a SEO 2.0 perspective are probably:
Domain popularity (how many domains link to you)
Domain age (how long is your domain online, the longer the better)
Social media saturation.
Search results= (200 signals) x (0.X)
Apologises I misunderstood the post. I read the referred article. It shows one thing interesting is that google is starting to tailor results to which user is doing the search (by use of their historical preferences). This means an stronger emphasis on site stickiness.
I hope this is the reason why I am getting some traffic to my new blog which has a PR of 0.I might be doing well on the other factors.
david: No need to apologise. It’s a difficult subject matter even for specialists so it’s easy to get things wrong as I also often have only limited time to explain.
Yeah Clement, PageRank can’t tell you much about traffic.
PageRank is not the major factor for the influence of your traffic flow. No, it is not. Websites with a higher ranking have in the most cases an high PR, but it could be that more websites the same or higher PR has as the number one ranking, but that is only on keywords with many competitors.
hey, its not 200+, its infinate number of signals ;), any number of. its an algo. it determines what is “juicy” at a signal level and what not. and its learning all the time. an evolutionary algorithm.