Question About Ranking for Highly Competitive Keywords

[seomaster7890]

Hello BHW members,
I know that high-quality links are important.

But is it really possible to rank for highly competitive keywords using only high-quality PBNs and guest posts?

When I analyze the top-ranking sites in my country, I notice that most of them have a lot of low-quality backlinks such as blog comments, directories, and Web 2.0s. Looking deeper, they usually have around 100 high-quality PBN links, and I’m not even sure if they use guest posts. Honestly, I think guest posts are not much different from PBNs that are simply monetized per article. (Most of them come with junk or manipulated traffic from countries like India or Pakistan. Also, since they’re often not placed on the homepage, the link juice is much weaker compared to PBNs. In my opinion, guest posts don’t directly push rankings but instead play more of a supporting role in increasing the overall trust of a money site. Of course, truly high-quality guest posts would help, but those are very expensive.)

From my own experience, I’ve seen a site built mostly with automated tools that ranked on page 1 for a KD 80+ keyword. This site also got indexed faster, and related keywords started showing up in Google Search Console (GSC) much earlier. Aside from automation, the site had only about 20 low-quality PBNs and guest posts pointing to it.

On the other hand, I’ve also seen a site built only with high-quality PBNs and guest posts, but even after 4.5 months there was no ranking jump at all—only some decent results for a few long-tail keywords. (The speed of keyword indexing and growth was clearly much slower as well.)

Based on this, I believe that the real ranking power comes from high-quality PBNs, while comments, directories, and Web 2.0s mainly serve to diversify the link profile, increase referring domains, and help Google build more trust and crawl the site more frequently.

Do you think my understanding is correct?

 

[GoogSEO]

Hello BHW members,
I know that high-quality links are important.

But is it really possible to rank for highly competitive keywords using only high-quality PBNs and guest posts?

When I analyze the top-ranking sites in my country, I notice that most of them have a lot of low-quality backlinks such as blog comments, directories, and Web 2.0s. Looking deeper, they usually have around 100 high-quality PBN links, and I’m not even sure if they use guest posts. Honestly, I think guest posts are not much different from PBNs that are simply monetized per article. (Most of them come with junk or manipulated traffic from countries like India or Pakistan. Also, since they’re often not placed on the homepage, the link juice is much weaker compared to PBNs. In my opinion, guest posts don’t directly push rankings but instead play more of a supporting role in increasing the overall trust of a money site. Of course, truly high-quality guest posts would help, but those are very expensive.)

From my own experience, I’ve seen a site built mostly with automated tools that ranked on page 1 for a KD 80+ keyword. This site also got indexed faster, and related keywords started showing up in Google Search Console (GSC) much earlier. Aside from automation, the site had only about 20 low-quality PBNs and guest posts pointing to it.

On the other hand, I’ve also seen a site built only with high-quality PBNs and guest posts, but even after 4.5 months there was no ranking jump at all—only some decent results for a few long-tail keywords. (The speed of keyword indexing and growth was clearly much slower as well.)

Based on this, I believe that the real ranking power comes from high-quality PBNs, while comments, directories, and Web 2.0s mainly serve to diversify the link profile, increase referring domains, and help Google build more trust and crawl the site more frequently.

Do you think my understanding is correct?

Yes, a well-built site can be ranked on competitive queries only due to PBN links from well-chosen resources.

The mass of low quality links does not prevent the site if it has previously managed to shine with good links and get a ranking.

At the same time low quality links on the contrary are an indicator that the site develops naturally, without these low quality links site can not exist.

 

[Byte Watch]

Hello BHW members,
I know that high-quality links are important.

But is it really possible to rank for highly competitive keywords using only high-quality PBNs and guest posts?

When I analyze the top-ranking sites in my country, I notice that most of them have a lot of low-quality backlinks such as blog comments, directories, and Web 2.0s. Looking deeper, they usually have around 100 high-quality PBN links, and I’m not even sure if they use guest posts. Honestly, I think guest posts are not much different from PBNs that are simply monetized per article. (Most of them come with junk or manipulated traffic from countries like India or Pakistan. Also, since they’re often not placed on the homepage, the link juice is much weaker compared to PBNs. In my opinion, guest posts don’t directly push rankings but instead play more of a supporting role in increasing the overall trust of a money site. Of course, truly high-quality guest posts would help, but those are very expensive.)

From my own experience, I’ve seen a site built mostly with automated tools that ranked on page 1 for a KD 80+ keyword. This site also got indexed faster, and related keywords started showing up in Google Search Console (GSC) much earlier. Aside from automation, the site had only about 20 low-quality PBNs and guest posts pointing to it.

On the other hand, I’ve also seen a site built only with high-quality PBNs and guest posts, but even after 4.5 months there was no ranking jump at all—only some decent results for a few long-tail keywords. (The speed of keyword indexing and growth was clearly much slower as well.)

Based on this, I believe that the real ranking power comes from high-quality PBNs, while comments, directories, and Web 2.0s mainly serve to diversify the link profile, increase referring domains, and help Google build more trust and crawl the site more frequently.

Do you think my understanding is correct?

Yes, high-quality PBNs can still push rankings, especially in certain niches, but long-term success often comes from a mix. Guest posts when truly editorial and relevant do build authority, but you’re right many are just glorified PBNs with weaker juice. Low-quality links like comments and Web 2.0s help with diversification and crawling but won’t move the needle alone

 

[seomaster7890]

Yes, a well-built site can be ranked on competitive queries only due to PBN links from well-chosen resources.

You mentioned that a well-built site can rank with PBNs alone,
but honestly, I’ve never seen such a case myself.

From the sites I’ve analyzed, all the top-ranking ones had diverse link profiles. Even if they had thousands of backlinks in total, the real core seemed to be around 100–200 PBNs.
But I’ve never come across a site that ranks with PBNs only.

Also, in my opinion, if you build links with nothing but PBNs, the link-building pattern becomes much more obvious and makes the site more vulnerable to penalties.

Have you personally ranked a site using PBNs only?
(Not talking about low KD keywords.)
If so, how many months did it take for the rankings to climb?

And if possible, could you share an example URL of a site that is currently ranking high with only PBN links?
Because I honestly haven’t seen a single example of that so far.

 

[HustleTong]

It's a question of ROI. Can you outspend other sites in the same niche that pays for HQ PBN?

 

[GoogSEO]

You mentioned that a well-built site can rank with PBNs alone,
but honestly, I’ve never seen such a case myself.

From the sites I’ve analyzed, all the top-ranking ones had diverse link profiles. Even if they had thousands of backlinks in total, the real core seemed to be around 100–200 PBNs.
But I’ve never come across a site that ranks with PBNs only.

Also, in my opinion, if you build links with nothing but PBNs, the link-building pattern becomes much more obvious and makes the site more vulnerable to penalties.

Have you personally ranked a site using PBNs only?
(Not talking about low KD keywords.)
If so, how many months did it take for the rankings to climb?

And if possible, could you share an example URL of a site that is currently ranking high with only PBN links?
Because I honestly haven’t seen a single example of that so far.

You just look at niches and queries that use other methods.

PBN promotion is often found in the field of education and in most niches with suggestions starting with the words “top...”

 

[ibetseo]

As I’m in iGaming (one of the most competitive niches), I’ve tested both sides — pure high-quality PBNs vs. guest posts — and here’s what I’ve learned:

1. PBNs = raw power
Strong PBN links move rankings faster, especially homepage placements. That’s why you’ll often see sites with 80–100 solid PBNs dominating brand terms and even some generic casino keywords.

2. Guest posts = trust layer
Most “guest posts” on the market are really just monetized PBNs with inflated DR and junk traffic. They don’t push rankings as hard, but they help diversify the link profile and make the site look safer. True editorial guest posts on real sites work, but they’re expensive and rare.

3. Low-quality links = filler
Blog comments, directories, Web 2.0s — they don’t rank you, but they create diversity, speed up crawling, and give Google more signals that your site is “alive.” That’s why you’ll see them in every top-ranking site’s profile.

4. Automation vs manual
Automated link building can spike a site into page 1 faster (I’ve seen it too), but it rarely lasts. Sites built mostly on PBNs/authority links climb slower but hold positions longer.

 

[sipoa]

do follow and no follow are benefit to rank website in all geo with WordPress,keyword/website ranking require loads of backlinks to get index on top search result pages for the keyword.
Pbn pages are effective with guest posting to help generate traffics from the source.

 

[Gnoseo1]

As I’m in iGaming (one of the most competitive niches), I’ve tested both sides — pure high-quality PBNs vs. guest posts — and here’s what I’ve learned:

1. PBNs = raw power
Strong PBN links move rankings faster, especially homepage placements. That’s why you’ll often see sites with 80–100 solid PBNs dominating brand terms and even some generic casino keywords.

2. Guest posts = trust layer
Most “guest posts” on the market are really just monetized PBNs with inflated DR and junk traffic. They don’t push rankings as hard, but they help diversify the link profile and make the site look safer. True editorial guest posts on real sites work, but they’re expensive and rare.

3. Low-quality links = filler
Blog comments, directories, Web 2.0s — they don’t rank you, but they create diversity, speed up crawling, and give Google more signals that your site is “alive.” That’s why you’ll see them in every top-ranking site’s profile.

4. Automation vs manual
Automated link building can spike a site into page 1 faster (I’ve seen it too), but it rarely lasts. Sites built mostly on PBNs/authority links climb slower but hold positions longer.

i wonder you are in betting industry but you want things related to sustainable and long term growth. the funny thing is that other people can completely dominate your keywords and swallow you easily with many black hat measures. this is black hat maybe you are in the wrong place.