*QUESTION* — Does multiple do-follow backlinks from the same sponsorered post have any -/+ effect.

[DonDidge]

I'm wondering if you should only have one backlink from a guest post or it would make sense to do 2-3 backlinks.

Ex. Trying to rank for "energy" keywords for my site - Im going to buy a quality guest post on a huge site with traffic. My idea is im going to make a similar page as the one ranking on my site, but the guest would link to 2-3 different pages on my website — Should I stick to one backlink or if done correctly add 1 or 2 more?

Thanks - Enjoy your day!

 

[tazarbm]

if the guest post seller is fine with you having 2-3 links go for it! Link once to the homepage, and once to the inner page that's most relevant to the guest post. The 3rd link can be to a relevant category, a PDF file, or even your social accounts...

 

[SirLouen]

I'm wondering if you should only have one backlink from a guest post or it would make sense to do 2-3 backlinks.

Ex. Trying to rank for "energy" keywords for my site - Im going to buy a quality guest post on a huge site with traffic. My idea is im going to make a similar page as the one ranking on my site, but the guest would link to 2-3 different pages on my website — Should I stick to one backlink or if done correctly add 1 or 2 more?

Thanks - Enjoy your day!

I've been reading very mixed opinions on this topic

Let's try to pick the logic behind linking nowadays.

If you link to different parts of the same website from within the same sponsored post, you are clearly telegraphing one message: this is an sponsored post. Not only this, but the whole domain itself, can telegraph this message (and even sections of the domain, for example, some domains offer this type of example.com/sponsored/ urls that render links inside completely useless.

Sponsored tagged posts are useless for SEO. They provide 0 value and Google has been intensifying their efforts on picking these links to a point of perfection.

Nowadays, they are troubled with PBNs (real PBNs not all the bullshit amount of "PBN sellers" you can find out there that are actually guest posts sites with 0 traffic) and partially with top media outlets.

So your job is to make Google think that the link is as natural as possible. 3 years ago, I would have said you to put a couple of links to different places of your page to raise your individual page trust awareness (or topical authority). But nowadays just focus on Domain Authority (it's the only proven ranking factor when talking about offpage SEO). Surely a page with direct links might rank better than a page in the same domain without them. And if you have an ecommerce, surely you will like to rank as many products/categories as possible, because they are sources of income. But the bad news here is that, as I said, being tagged as sponsored link is tragic for your ranking purposes. And as I say, the only two ways of being tagged is by allocating suspicious links or by simply linking from a tagged domain.

The bad news: Linkbuilding has never been as difficult as now.
The bright news: Getting a good link is more valued than ever.

PS: About nofollow/d0follow, nofollow by default is synonym of sponsored (historically). They added this new tags ugc and sponsored that noone is barely using them. So if the site has mixed links (nofollow/d0follow), then nofollow is worthless. But still some sites like Wikipedia have a full nofollow policy and Google knows about this. So a link from Wikipedia is massive authority.

 

[DonDidge]

if the guest post seller is fine with you having 2-3 links go for it! Link once to the homepage, and once to the inner page that's most relevant to the guest post. The 3rd link can be to a relevant category, a PDF file, or even your social accounts...

Thanks! — So you're saying and have experienced that multiple backlinks from the same post won't have a negative impact (in theory)?

 

[Xpert_IT_Lab]

2-3 links is perfectly fine and natural, just make sure to keep it under a reasonable limit and don't do something stupid like 10 links unless it absolutely makes sense to do so.

also if every page that links to you has multiple links that point to your site it can get problematic unless you are huge authority in your niche and are very quotable (a wikipedia of sorts in your particular niche). unless that's the case make sure it's only every now and then and you'll be fine.

 

[praetserge]

I've been reading very mixed opinions on this topic

Let's try to pick the logic behind linking nowadays.

If you link to different parts of the same website from within the same sponsored post, you are clearly telegraphing one message: this is an sponsored post. Not only this, but the whole domain itself, can telegraph this message (and even sections of the domain, for example, some domains offer this type of example.com/sponsored/ urls that render links inside completely useless.

Sponsored tagged posts are useless for SEO. They provide 0 value and Google has been intensifying their efforts on picking these links to a point of perfection.

Nowadays, they are troubled with PBNs (real PBNs not all the bullshit amount of "PBN sellers" you can find out there that are actually guest posts sites with 0 traffic) and partially with top media outlets.

So your job is to make Google think that the link is as natural as possible. 3 years ago, I would have said you to put a couple of links to different places of your page to raise your individual page trust awareness (or topical authority). But nowadays just focus on Domain Authority (it's the only proven ranking factor when talking about offpage SEO). Surely a page with direct links might rank better than a page in the same domain without them. And if you have an ecommerce, surely you will like to rank as many products/categories as possible, because they are sources of income. But the bad news here is that, as I said, being tagged as sponsored link is tragic for your ranking purposes. And as I say, the only two ways of being tagged is by allocating suspicious links or by simply linking from a tagged domain.

The bad news: Linkbuilding has never been as difficult as now.
The bright news: Getting a good link is more valued than ever.

PS: About nofollow/d0follow, nofollow by default is synonym of sponsored (historically). They added this new tags ugc and sponsored that noone is barely using them. So if the site has mixed links (nofollow/d0follow), then nofollow is worthless. But still some sites like Wikipedia have a full nofollow policy and Google knows about this. So a link from Wikipedia is massive authority.

I understand your logic behind but I would like to chime in.
I think it's a good idea to add 1 homepage + 1 internal page link... if... there are other links in the article, like internal and external to other sites then your 2 links will fit in naturally.

 

[DonDidge]

I've been reading very mixed opinions on this topic

Let's try to pick the logic behind linking nowadays.

If you link to different parts of the same website from within the same sponsored post, you are clearly telegraphing one message: this is an sponsored post. Not only this, but the whole domain itself, can telegraph this message (and even sections of the domain, for example, some domains offer this type of example.com/sponsored/ urls that render links inside completely useless.

Sponsored tagged posts are useless for SEO. They provide 0 value and Google has been intensifying their efforts on picking these links to a point of perfection.

Nowadays, they are troubled with PBNs (real PBNs not all the bullshit amount of "PBN sellers" you can find out there that are actually guest posts sites with 0 traffic) and partially with top media outlets.

So your job is to make Google think that the link is as natural as possible. 3 years ago, I would have said you to put a couple of links to different places of your page to raise your individual page trust awareness (or topical authority). But nowadays just focus on Domain Authority (it's the only proven ranking factor when talking about offpage SEO). Surely a page with direct links might rank better than a page in the same domain without them. And if you have an ecommerce, surely you will like to rank as many products/categories as possible, because they are sources of income. But the bad news here is that, as I said, being tagged as sponsored link is tragic for your ranking purposes. And as I say, the only two ways of being tagged is by allocating suspicious links or by simply linking from a tagged domain.

The bad news: Linkbuilding has never been as difficult as now.
The bright news: Getting a good link is more valued than ever.

PS: About nofollow/d0follow, nofollow by default is synonym of sponsored (historically). They added this new tags ugc and sponsored that noone is barely using them. So if the site has mixed links (nofollow/d0follow), then nofollow is worthless. But still some sites like Wikipedia have a full nofollow policy and Google knows about this. So a link from Wikipedia is massive authority.

Thanks for the detailed answer! VERY useful and a bit disturbing with the whole /sponsored/ part — assuming the "no value" could be offering negative value ngl. Another recommendation would be to avoid ALL kinds of "sponsored" tags, both on page and in the url?

 

[DonDidge]

I understand your logic behind but I would like to chime in.
I think it's a good idea to add 1 homepage + 1 internal page link... if... there are other links in the article, like internal and external to other sites then your 2 links will fit in naturally.

My understanding of best practises for a guest post (backlinking article) is:
1 backlink form top section to your page
1 one internal link
1 link to another high DR relevant page

Does that fit?

 

[SirLouen]

Thanks for the detailed answer! VERY useful and a bit disturbing with the whole /sponsored/ part — assuming the "no value" could be offering negative value ngl. Another recommendation would be to avoid ALL kinds of "sponsored" tags, both on page and in the url?

I don't really think that negative value is a thing anymore (after the negative SEO attacks in the past, I think that given the power that Google/LLM acquire, they were confident to separate a shit link from a quality link).

So it's super easy for Google to do this classification nowadays.

But one thing I think that its difficult to understand in the practice is that "easy" doesn't mean right. Google can easily classify, but it doesnt mean that its classifying right in both directions: one super-legit page could be tagged as sponsored, while one poor quality page that has some little tricky feats, could handle to go through sponsored filters. So you never really with 100% precision what can you expect where you are placing your link, it's pure intuition.

I understand your logic behind but I would like to chime in.
I think it's a good idea to add 1 homepage + 1 internal page link... if... there are other links in the article, like internal and external to other sites then your 2 links will fit in naturally.

Yeah, that could perfectly make sense ngl. After all there is a degree of voodoo powers in all this and logic can be sometimes very skewed to one side. This strategy can perfectly work. Although personally, knowing how classification algos have evolved in the past 2 years (in which I'm working full time nowadays), I would not risk it that much.

It's funny because I've lived this, when you have a couple of categories to rank, and you feel that ideally one link would be great, but you need at least 3 or 4 to be satisfied and this is a massive trouble, because your budget won't give to link from 4 different sites (and ideally you would prefer 4x power in just one destination, or preferably, in all 4 destinations).

But again, I would not risk it nowadays anymore. 2 years ago, with GPT-2 classification was great but not reliable, but not brilliant (70% accuracy at best). But nowadays even 2B quantized models with a little PEFT are classifying like crazy (85-90% accuracy) and I'm 100% sure that Google is not using BERT-340M for this task anymore.

 

[tazarbm]

Thanks! — So you're saying and have experienced that multiple backlinks from the same post won't have a negative impact (in theory)?

they have no negative impact both in theory and practice. Go for it!

 

[tiiberius]

I personally do 1. I wouldn't go over 2.

I haven't tested this in a while but in theory it should still be like this:

First discovered link gets priority and most juice. Second one less so. Third one plus will probably start to give diminishing returns.

 

[GenesisOne]

I understand your logic behind but I would like to chime in.
I think it's a good idea to add 1 homepage + 1 internal page link... if... there are other links in the article, like internal and external to other sites then your 2 links will fit in naturally.

Why would you want to do this?
Several backlinks from the same source count as just 1.

 

[DonDidge]

Why would you want to do this?
Several backlinks from the same source count as just 1.

Source = webpage? So mulitple articals from the site with different backlink anchors wouldn't count? Is that a know thing?