What is better? ZERO backlinks or 1000 spammy backlinks?

Has nobody here registered a new domain in the last few months? Any new reg gets about 500+ spammy links picked up in Ahrefs straight away! People are way too precious about a thing they don't have control over, or are just copy/pasting bot responses.
 
Has nobody here registered a new domain in the last few months? Any new reg gets about 500+ spammy links picked up in Ahrefs straight away! People are way too precious about a thing they don't have control over, or are just copy/pasting bot responses.
Yeah, I agree. New sites can naturally pick up hundreds of spammy links, so having them alone isn't something to worry about. At the same time, I still think there is a difference between naturally getting spam links and deliberately buying 1,000 random links. In some aggressive niches, they may give quick movement, but they are not a universal strategy
 
I’d take zero backlinks over 1,000 random Fiverr links.

Start clean, then build a few relevant links from real sites. Quality matters much more than the raw number.
 
If 1000 reverse links can be posted 10 times each day and continued for over 3 months, the effect will definitely be much better than posting them within a week or 10 days. Even for low-weight website links, this approach is still more effective.
 
Zero backlinks is neutral, but 1000 random Fiverr links are actively harmful; most come from spam networks with no relevance, and Google spots that pattern easily. A new site with zero links looks unestablished, which is normal. A new site with 1000 spam links looks manipulative, which can trigger a penalty before it even gets a chance to grow.
 
If you are launching a new website, which one is better: zero backlinks or buy a random 1000 backlink package from Fiverr?

Sometimes, doing nothing (zero backlinks) feels safer and more peaceful than doing something risky, like throwing 1,000 random backlinks at a new site.
 
Honestly, I’d go with zero. Starting clean is much better than filling a new site with thousands of junk links. Quality takes time, but it’s worth it.
 
I will share my experience here,because spammy backlinks can actually work in some cases.

Key Point : Google does not necessarily count every bad backlink. A lot of low quality links simply get ignored,which is also why "negative SEO" is not as straight forward as it used to be.

That being said, I would not recommend blasting 1,000 spammy links directly to a new website.Extreme spam can still cause problems.

I have seen people using tools like RankerX to build large numbers of links,and it can work in certain niches.

How to do then : If I were doing it, I would keep Tier 1 relatively controlled and use the heavier spam on Tier 2 instead. For example, build hundred links in Tier 1 and then use thousands of lower quality links to support those Tier 1 links.

So, in my experience, it is not simply “zero backlinks is always better.” It depends on the niche, the strategy, and how the links are structured.

Hope this helps answer the question.
 
If you are launching a new website, which one is better: zero backlinks or buy a random 1000 backlink package from Fiverr?
zero backlinks easily.random 1k backlink not make your website good reputation and doesnt give any kind of value.and if you start a good content and create relevant backlink it making worth of you site
 
Of course "1000 spammy backlinks" is better - that way you'll become my client a lot faster.
All jokes aside, most of these one-off links from junk sites will never even get indexed. And the ones that do get indexed are usually flagged by Google as spam and discounted.. you'd actually have to try pretty damn hard to kill a site with spammy backlinks.
 
What's better an std riddled escort or a clean one?

same thing for your site ;).
 
Back
Top