Was told ahrefs is worthless.

[erussx2]

I've been using it for several years now, and even made the switch from Majestic SEO.

It does show the links, but not all of them. I don't think any tool like Ahrefs can give you a 100% accuracy when it comes to showing the links for a particular site. Despite that being said, I still use Ahrefs and it works fine for me for what I need.

When you say it works fine, how do you use it?

I looked up a competitor of mine and it said he had 33,000 backlinks. But since ahrefs can not possibly know them all as many have now said, he could have 133,000 for all I know.

therefore, what good did looking on ahrefs do me?

 

[Andrew Scherer]

therefore, what good did looking on ahrefs do me?

Ahrefs hardware is the best out of any other tools on the market and it has been proven through side-by-side case studies that it is the best backlink research tool on the market.

If you think that there is no value in researching your own or your competitors backlink profile, even if it not the complete profile, well then perhaps its back to the SEO drawing board for you son.

I would rather have 1 eye than be blind any day of the week - you read me?

 

[duck_prince]

Ahrefs is the best tool for checking backlink

 

[erussx2]

Ahrefs hardware is the best out of any other tools on the market and it has been proven through side-by-side case studies that it is the best backlink research tool on the market.

If you think that there is no value in researching your own or your competitors backlink profile, even if it not the complete profile, well then perhaps its back to the SEO drawing board for you son.

I would rather have 1 eye than be blind any day of the week - you read me?

Ok, so please tell us where these studies are.

 

[erussx2]

Ahrefs is the best tool for checking backlink

according to who?

 

[Andrew Scherer]

Ok, so please tell us where these studies are.

http://www.matthewwoodward.co.uk/ex...majestic-seo-seomoz-raven-tools-seo-spyglass/

But your contention is that checking backlinks has no purpose so I don't think this case study would be useful to you either way.

 

[erussx2]

http://www.matthewwoodward.co.uk/ex...majestic-seo-seomoz-raven-tools-seo-spyglass/

But your contention is that checking backlinks has no purpose so I don't think this case study would be useful to you either way.

That just compares different checkers. It has nothing to do with the effectiveness of any one particular checker.

No I am not saying it has no purpose. I am saying that the guy at SENuke told me ahrefs checked only a fraction of the backlinks available and only the ones that ahrefs knows about. And the ones that ahrefs knows about are only a fraction of what actually exist. Therefore, it is basically useless. ahrefs CAN tell you the backlinks they know about. So the purpose is to do that. Is that useful?

 

[warner410]

And the ones that ahrefs knows about are only a fraction of what actually exist.

That's true but that doesn't make ahrefs worthless.

Keep in mind that you don't have to stop after checking backlinks of 1 site.

You can check backlinks of not just sites in your niche, but any type of sites.

If you get 5% of backlinks of each site from ahrefs and then add them all up, you will get a very large list of backlinks.

Also, having a list of backlinks is not enough, you need tools/ways to replicate those backlinks for your own site.

 

[media20]

Its really about how you use the tool and what your needs are.

 

[erussx2]

Its really about how you use the tool and what your needs are.

How do you use a tool that gives you an unknown portion of backlinks from that which exist?

Im not being combative. I am really asking. I want to know.

 

[erussx2]

That's true but that doesn't make ahrefs worthless.

Keep in mind that you don't have to stop after checking backlinks of 1 site.

You can check backlinks of not just sites in your niche, but any type of sites.

If you get 5% of backlinks of each site from ahrefs and then add them all up, you will get a very large list of backlinks.

Also, having a list of backlinks is not enough, you need tools/ways to replicate those backlinks for your own site.

So you are saying that knowing only 5% is good enough?

ok.

 

[warner410]

So you are saying that knowing only 5% is good enough?

ok.

That's how I use it.

I take a small amount of links from a very large number of sites, make a big list and try to replicate the whole list.

This is a list that I made in 1 hour. The biggest file has 5000 links, so you can imagine how many links I can discover in a day.

Of course, I can't manually process such big lists and need tools like GSA SER to process them.

 

[Andrew Scherer]

That just compares different checkers. It has nothing to do with the effectiveness of any one particular checker.

The effectiveness of a backlink checker is graded on a scale relevant to other backlink checkers, isn't it ?

No I am not saying it has no purpose. I am saying that the guy at SENuke told me ahrefs checked only a fraction of the backlinks available and only the ones that ahrefs knows about.

What your friend doesn't understand, is that this is the case for all backlink checkers.

And the ones that ahrefs knows about are only a fraction of what actually exist.

All backlink checkers, including Google itself, only sees what it crawls. Ahrefs has the most comprehensive public database of backlinks simply because they have the most robust hardware.

Therefore, it is basically useless.

If you say so.

ahrefs CAN tell you the backlinks they know about. So the purpose is to do that. Is that useful?

Yes.

 

[erussx2]

That's how I use it.

I take a small amount of links from a very large number of sites, make a big list and try to replicate the whole list.

This is a list that I made in 1 hour. The biggest file has 5000 links, so you can imagine how many links I can discover in a day.

Of course, I can't manually process such big lists and need tools like GSA SER to process them.

View attachment 35208

Ok. Cool.

 

[erussx2]

The effectiveness of a backlink checker is graded on a scale relevant to other backlink checkers, isn't it ?



What your friend doesn't understand, is that this is the case for all backlink checkers.



All backlink checkers, including Google itself, only sees what it crawls. Ahrefs has the most comprehensive public database of backlinks simply because they have the most robust hardware.



If you say so.



Yes.

I dont know

I think he does understand. He works for SENuke. Im sure he has ponderded that question before.


But you still dont know how many of a site backlinks ahrefs can know about. Do you?

I guess the bottom line is that for some people, knowing something is good enough. So that is not useless for some I guess.

 

[xrbases]

yeah, yeah guys! ahrefs don't work, don't use it. its worths! never use it if you want to have good scraped bases.)

 

[QuantumBlue Bulgaria]

I think it still comes down on how you use it just like the other tools. What they are telling you is definitely based on their experiences and we have different experiences. If one cannot use the tool to its fullest potential, of course it becomes useless. One way to find out is to test it out ourselves and use other tools to compare to be sure what works best for us.

 

[Micoli]

actually a lot of services use ahrefs. but it is not enough. so, search services that use more sites alike ahrefs for their check.

 

[SeoTrain]

ahref is always been best tool for me.

 

[erussx2]

ahref is always been best tool for me.

What does it do for you?