手机用华为
推广找展为

新域名权威的综合分析

来源:【手机用华为 推广找展为】   2019-04-07 建站、优化、推广、请加微信(9196389)

新域权威的综合分析
高级SEO | 工具 | 链接建设
Moz的域名管理机构每年要求超过1,000,000,000次,它在网络上被引用数百万次,并且它已成为各种用例的搜索引擎优化器中名副其实的家喻户晓的名称,从确定链接构建活动的成功到符合条件域名购买。随着Moz推出全新的,改进的,更大的链接索引,我们认识到有机会重新审视Domain Authority,其严谨性与我们几年前的关键词数量相同(开创了点击流建模关键词数据的时代)。

以下是对新域权限度量标准的严格处理。我在这篇文章中不会做的是重新讨论域名管理机构是否重要  或其适当的用例是什么。我已经并将在稍后的帖子中详细讨论这些问题。相反,我打算花费以下段落从多个方向处理新的域权限度量标准。

DA和SERP排名之间的相关性
Domain Authority最重要的组成部分是它与搜索结果的关联程度。但首先,让我们得出相关性与因果关系的异议:Domain Authority不会导致搜索排名。它不是排名因素。域管理局预测一个域胜过另一个域的可能性。话虽如此,它作为度量标准的实用性在很大程度上与这个值有关。相关性越强,域管理机构在预测排名方面就越有价值。

方法
多年来,已经以许多不同的方式确定度量和SERP排名之间的“相关性”。我们应该与“真正的第一页”,前10名,前20名,前50名还是前100名进行比较?我们需要收集多少SERP才能使我们的结果具有统计显着性?重要的是,我概述了可重复性的方法以及对所用技术的任何评论或关注。出于本研究的目的,我选择使用“真正的第一页”。这意味着仅使用没有附加参数的关键字收集SERP。我选择使用这个特定的数据集有很多原因:

真正的第一页是大多数用户体验的,因此Domain Authority的预测能力将集中在用户看到的内容上。
By not using any special parameters, we're likely to get Google's typical results. 
By not extending beyond the true first page, we're likely to avoid manually penalized sites (which can impact the correlations with links.)
We did NOT use the same training set or training set size as we did for this correlation study. That is to say, we trained on the top 10 but are reporting correlations on the true first page. This prevents us from the potential of having a result overly biased towards our model. 
I randomly selected 16,000 keywords from the United States keyword corpus for Keyword Explorer. I then collected the true first page for all of these keywords (completely different from those used in the training set.) I extracted the URLs but I also chose to remove duplicate domains (ie: if the same domain occurred, one after another.) For a length of time, Google used to cluster domains together in the SERPs under certain circumstances. It was easy to spot these clusters, as the second and later listings were indented. No such indentations are present any longer, but we can't be certain that Google never groups domains. If they do group domains, it would throw off the correlation because it's the grouping and not the traditional link-based algorithm doing the work.

I collected the Domain Authority (Moz), Citation Flow and Trust Flow (Majestic), and Domain Rank (Ahrefs) for each domain and calculated the mean Spearman correlation coefficient for each SERP. I then averaged the coefficients for each metric.

Outcome
Moz's new Domain Authority has the strongest correlations with SERPs of the competing strength-of-domain link-based metrics in the industry. The sign (-/+) has been inverted in the graph for readability, although the actual coefficients are negative (and should be).


Moz's Domain Authority scored a ~.12, or roughly 6% stronger than the next best competitor (Domain Rank by Ahrefs.) Domain Authority performed 35% better than CitationFlow and 18% better than TrustFlow. This isn't surprising, in that Domain Authority is trained to predict rankings while our competitor's strength-of-domain metrics are not. It shouldn't be taken as a negative that our competitors strength-of-domain metrics don't correlate as strongly as Moz's Domain Authority — rather, it's simply exemplary of the intrinsic differences between the metrics. That being said, if you want a metric that best predicts rankings at the domain level, Domain Authority is that metric.

Note: At first blush, Domain Authority's improvements over the competition are, frankly, underwhelming. The truth is that we could quite easily increase the correlation further, but doing so would risk over-fitting and compromising a secondary goal of Domain Authority...

Handling link manipulation
Historically, Domain Authority has focused on only one single feature: maximizing the predictive capacity of the metric. All we wanted were the highest correlations. However, Domain Authority has become, for better or worse, synonymous with "domain value" in many sectors, such as among link buyers and domainers. Subsequently, as bizarre as it may sound, Domain Authority has itself been targeted for spam in order to bolster the score and sell at a higher price. While these crude link manipulation techniques didn't work so well in Google, they were sufficient to increase Domain Authority. We decided to rein that in. 

Data sets
The first thing we did was compile a series off data sets that corresponded with industries we wished to impact, knowing that Domain Authority was regularly manipulated in these circles.

Random domains
Moz customers
Blog comment spam
Low-quality auction domains
Mid-quality auction domains
High-quality auction domains
Known link sellers
Known link buyers
Domainer network
Link network
While it would be my preference to release all the data sets, I've chosen not to in order to not "out" any website in particular. Instead, I opted to provide these data sets to a number of search engine marketers for validation. The only data set not offered for outside validation was Moz customers, for obvious reasons.

Methodology
For each of the above data sets, I collected both the old and new Domain Authority scores. This was conducted all on February 28th in order to have parity for all tests. I then calculated the relative difference between the old DA and new DA within each group. Finally, I compared the various data set results against one another to confirm that the model addresses the various methods of inflating Domain Authority.

Results

In the above graph, blue represents the Old Average Domain Authority for that data set and orange represents the New Average Domain Authority for that same data set. One immediately noticeable feature is that every category drops. Even random domains drops. This is a re-centering of the Domain Authority score and should cause no alarm to webmasters. There is, on average, a 6% reduction in Domain Authority for randomly selected domains from the web. Thus, if your Domain Authority drops a few points, you are well within the range of normal. Now, let's look at the various data sets individually.


Random domains: -6.1%
Using the same methodology of finding random domains which we use for collecting comparative link statistics, I selected 1,000 domains, we were able to determine that there is, on average, a 6.1% drop in Domain Authority. It's important that webmasters recognize this, as the shift is likely to affect most sites and is nothing to worry about.  

Moz customers: -7.4%
Of immediate interest to Moz is how our own customers perform in relation to the random set of domains. On average, the Domain Authority of Moz customers lowered by 7.4%. This is very close to the random set of URLs and indicates that most Moz customers are likely not using techniques to manipulate DA to any large degree.  

Link buyers: -15.9%
Surprisingly, link buyers only lost 15.9% of their Domain Authority. In retrospect, this seems reasonable. First, we looked specifically at link buyers from blog networks, which aren't as spammy as many other techniques. Second, most of the sites paying for links are also optimizing their site's content, which means the sites do rank, sometimes quite well, in Google. Because Domain Authority trains against actual rankings, it's reasonable to expect that the link buyers data set would not be impacted as highly as other techniques because the neural network learns that some link buying patterns actually work. 

Comment spammers: -34%
Here's where the fun starts. The neural network behind Domain Authority was able to drop comment spammers' average DA by 34%. I was particularly pleased with this one because of all the types of link manipulation addressed by Domain Authority, comment spam is, in my honest opinion, no better than vandalism. Hopefully this will have a positive impact on decreasing comment spam — every little bit counts. 

Link sellers: -56%
I was actually quite surprised, at first, that link sellers on average dropped 56% in Domain Authority. I knew that link sellers often participated in link schemes (normally interlinking their own blog networks to build up DA) so that they can charge higher prices. However, it didn't occur to me that link sellers would be easier to pick out because they explicitly do not optimize their own sites beyond links. Subsequently, link sellers tend to have inflated, bogus link profiles and flimsy content, which means they tend to not rank in Google. If they don't rank, then the neural network behind Domain Authority is likely to pick up on the trend. It will be interesting to see how the market responds to such a dramatic change in Domain Authority.

High-quality auction domains: -61%
One of the features that I'm most proud of in regards to Domain Authority is that it effectively addressed link manipulation in order of our intuition regarding quality. I created three different data sets out of one larger data set (auction domains), where I used certain qualifiers like price, TLD, and archive.org status to label each domain as high-quality, mid-quality, and low-quality. In theory, if the neural network does its job correctly, we should see the high-quality domains impacted the least and the low-quality domains impacted the most. This is the exact pattern which was rendered by the new model. High-quality auction domains dropped an average of 61% in Domain Authority. That seems really high for "high-quality" auction domains, but even a cursory glance at the backlink profiles of domains that are up for sale in the $10K+ range shows clear link manipulation. The domainer industry, especially the domainer-for-SEO industry, is rife with spam. 

Link network: -79%
There is one network on the web that troubles me more than any other. I won't name it, but it's particularly pernicious because the sites in this network all link to the top 1,000,000 sites on the web. If your site is in the top 1,000,000 on the web, you'll likely see hundreds of root linking domains from this network no matter which link index you look at (Moz, Majestic, or Ahrefs). You can imagine my delight to see that it drops roughly 79% in Domain Authority, and rightfully so, as the vast majority of these sites have been banned by Google.

Mid-quality auction domains: -95%
Continuing with the pattern regarding the quality of auction domains, you can see that "mid-quality" auction domains dropped nearly 95% in Domain Authority. This is huge. Bear in mind that these drastic drops are not combined with losses in correlation with SERPs; rather, the neural network is learning to distinguish between backlink profiles far more effectively, separating the wheat from the chaff. 

Domainer networks: -97%
If you spend any time looking at dropped domains, you have probably come upon a domainer network where there are a series of sites enumerated and all linking to one another. For example, the first site might be sbt001.com, then sbt002.com, and so on and so forth for thousands of domains. While it's obvious for humans to look at this and see a pattern, Domain Authority needed to learn that these techniques do not correlate with rankings. The new Domain Authority does just that, dropping the domainer networks we analyzed on average by 97%.

Low-quality auction domains: -98%
Finally, the worst offenders — low-quality auction domains — dropped 98% on average. Domain Authority just can't be fooled in the way it has in the past. You have to acquire good links in the right proportions (in accordance with a natural model and sites that already rank) if you wish to have a strong Domain Authority score. 

What does this mean?
For most webmasters, this means very little. Your Domain Authority might drop a little bit, but so will your competitors'. For search engine optimizers, especially consultants and agencies, it means quite a bit. The inventories of known link sellers will probably diminish dramatically overnight. High DA links will become far more rare. The same is true of those trying to construct private blog networks (PBNs). Of course, Domain Authority doesn't cause rankings so it won't impact your current rank, but it should give consultants and agencies a much smarter metric for assessing quality.

What are the best use cases for DA?
比较您的域名管理中心与竞争对手的变化。如果您显着下降或显着增加,则可能表明您的链接配置文件存在重大差异。
比较域管理中的更改随时间的变化。新的域名管理机构也将在历史上进行更新,因此您可以跟踪您的DA。如果你的DA随着时间的推移而减少,特别是相对于你的竞争对手,你可能需要开始外展。
在寻求收购掉线或拍卖域时评估链接质量。 那些希望收购掉线或拍卖领域的人现在拥有更强大的工具来评估质量。当然,DA不应该是评估链接或域的质量的主要指标,但它肯定应该在每个网站管理员的工具包中。

上一篇:4月份百度排名大幅波动分析

下一篇:谷歌如何通过搜索意图来处理内容

返回列表

最新资讯最新资讯

网络推广服务A建设 网络推广套餐B建设 网络推广套餐C建设 网络推广套餐D建设 网络推广套餐E建设 战略合作建设 网站建设制作推广建设

更多 +联系我们

业务电话:139338712120311/80836913

业务微信:  业务QQ: 

E-mail

本站关键词

网站建设,网页设计,网站建设公司,网站制作,制作网站,网页制作,手机网站,做网站,建网站,,网站建设服务,建设网站,高端网站建设,网站制作公司,网站制作公司