Which is better PBN or web 2.0?

[deepakweb]

PBN is a Blackhat technique.

 

[Ali008]

Are links from high DA sites but no traffic worth anything?

 

[fb3003]

Are links from high DA sites but no traffic worth anything?

most websites on the internet do not have any traffic!

so if your URL does have a high DA, it helps a bit. PA and TF are also very important.

 

[Ali008]

most websites on the internet do not have any traffic!

so if your URL does have a high DA, it helps a bit. PA and TF are also very important.

So traffic actually makes no difference and only metrics are important to look at?

 

[MyLead]

Well-built PBN is way stronger than Web 2.0 but both are pretty strong and diversity is very important.

 

[The Rock SEO]

Both are good but, I like web2.0

 

[Neptune's Kiss]

If you have enough resources and time to build a nice PBN then I would go with that over just web 2.0's . However, both are good and eventually you will want to have a nice PBN and a nice web 2.0 network of sorts. Gotta mix it up baby.

 

[Scrox]

The power is in the control... I say PBN.

 

[PeterPerseo]

PBN is a Blackhat technique.

LOL! You probably have written in the wrong blog!

 

[soum500]

pbn works better for me, never try web 2.0 expired

 

[fb3003]

So traffic actually makes no difference and only metrics are important to look at?

i did not say that. if 2 sites have same metric, the one with traffic give you more power.

another scenario,
site A: has a TF of 25 and no traffic
Site B: has a TF of 10 and has traffic

a backlink from site A gives more serp benefit.

it is not an absolute science.

 

[Nut-Nights]

Both are good, But PBNs are little riskier, and you need a mix of both to get the results. Its not like you can rank a keyword alone with web 2.0s.