Ahrefs vs. Majestic RDs

GregFromMoonsy said:

@Stas Va

I see on your Ahrefs screenshot 1,598 backlinks, but in Google sheet you listed ONLY 978
Can you update it please to full list ?
I don't like such manipulations.

When you'll update the Google sheet with Ahrefs BL - I'll run my crawlers to verify all BL.
Seems, your Ahrefs have bigger chance to win, because Majestic have "only" 1,269 backlinks.

I'll check the raw BL data without any filter, as you aren't able to use such filter in Ahrefs.
And I don't like such manipulations as I said previously.

Then we'll compare my results with yours, to see the reality.
Hope that you will not disappear in mean time

Just be the man.
And we'll continue.

Cheers, Greg.

Click to expand...

Stas Va said:

Moreover to be fair, almost 600 backlinks from 1598 - where duplicates. So overall there are only 977 unique URL's.

Click to expand...

It's a simple URL validation. Do you need explanation, why and how you need to validate links your are getting, before you start the campaign ?

GregFromMoonsy said:

@Stas Va
I'll check the raw BL data without any filter, as you aren't able to use such filter in Ahrefs.
And I don't like such manipulations as I said previously.

Then we'll compare my results with yours, to see the reality.
Hope that you will not disappear in mean time

Click to expand...

Will be waiting ! Be sure if you somehow forget, I will not lose the opportunity to remind you about declaration.

p.s.
So did you make you homework and googled the difference between URL/Page & Found/Crawled concepts ?

@Stas Va

Full list of Ahrefs BL are needed to reliable compare Majestic to Ahrefs.
Seems, you again trying some manipulations to hide some facts.

Please also check ALL links from Majestic by your "software", not only selected.
Then please also update your Google sheet with Majestic data with your "software" crawl result.
Because again you trying some manipulations.

As I told you - be the man with eggs.
Because each fool is able to trolling on new registered nick - don't be one of them.

As only you'll update mentioned data - I'll run my crawlers as I promised.
Hope that you and your team will be able to collect mentioned data in one week

Cheers, Greg.

GregFromMoonsy said:

@Stas Va

Full list of Ahrefs BL are needed to reliable compare Majestic to Ahrefs.
Seems, you again trying some manipulations to hide some facts.

Please also check ALL links from Majestic by your "software", not only selected.
Then please also update your Google sheet with Majestic.
Because again you trying some manipulations.

As I told you - be the man with eggs.
Because each fool is able to trolling on new registered nick - don't be one of them.

As only you'll update mentioned data - I'll run my crawlers as I promised.

Cheers, Greg.

Click to expand...

It feels you don't understand the rules.
If you are declaring something you should proof your words.
I proved mine. From your part I see only additional conditions. No proofs.

• You lied about your scipt
• You lied about statistics Majestic vs ahrefs (giving out 2 different concepts for one)

Or you can proof your words ?

I see you just trying to go away from the disput. And we both know you have no other way. Because you cannot refute my words, you can't explain why you have replaced concepts and you definitely do not have the script you are talking about. Most likely you do not have even a full subscription to both services.
Just another Talking Head in our industry.

No proofs. Fake statistics, high conceit and 0 essence.

@Stas Va aka @FatBee

Seems Ahrefs Historical Index is more dead than Elvis
Only 90 links exists from 1,598 - what mean 94.4% of shit.

So, you tried some manipulation with partial BL from Majestic, but it failed.
You tried to show that Ahrefs have bigger fresh index than Majestic, but it failed too.

Now you trying to say that I wrote something about "my script"
But I am understand, that such amateur don't see the difference between system and script.
And also you aren't able even to quote such my sentence - because it exists only in your sick imagine.

Later I'll analyse your "crawling data" and will compare to my system data,
then everyone will discover that you have null expirience in this area mr @FatBee
It will be great advertise for you as you offer (OMG) some freelancing job.

"You know everything but don't understand absolutely nothing"
What I said previously and what you confirmed many times. I'll underline it at your wish.

Strong laugh guaranteed!
See you later @FatBee

Cheers, Greg.

GregFromMoonsy said:

@Stas Va aka @FatBee

Seems Ahrefs Historical Index is more dead than Elvis
Only 90 links exists from 1,598 - what mean 94.4% of shit.

So, you tried some manipulation with partial BL from Majestic, but it failed.
You tried to show that Ahrefs have bigger fresh index than Majestic, but it failed too.

Now you trying to say that I wrote something about "my script"
But I am understand, that such amateur don't see the difference between system and script.
And also you aren't able even to quote such my sentence - because it exists only in your sick imagine.

Later I'll analyse your "crawling data" and will compare to my system data,
then everyone will discover that you have null expirience in this area mr @FatBee
It will be great advertise for you as you offer (OMG) some freelancing job.

"You know everything but don't understand absolutely nothing"
What I said previously and what you confirmed many times. I'll underline it at your wish.

Strong laugh guaranteed!
See you later @FatBee

Cheers, Greg.

Click to expand...

Yep sure crappy, but there was nothing to expect from historical index... . But even that is 30 % more real backlinks than Majestic index contains.

So no script (or system that will check thousands of links in minutes) ? No proves ? No arguments ?

Game. Set. Match.

GregFromMoonsy said:

@Stas Va

At first I told you - be the man and please write under your second nick @FatBee
Seems, you're the brothers when it coming about style of writing and programming skills.

As you requested, I was validate your data with my system,
here the results:

I was teaching you how to create the queue:



But you aren't able to learn nothing - because it's too much complicated to you
In result - as classical amateur you doing a lot of unnecessary HTTP requests:


View attachment 121946
Deleted domains:

greenthekeys.com
shoptrends.org

Urls without the valid hosts:

http://www.itelevision.nl/the-kings-gardens/
http://smtp.theonlykosherdirectory.com/search/Everywhere/Gifts
http://www.www.seopivot.com/expressflowers.net
http://www.kingscreekflowersmiami.com/contact-us.shtml

Of course for your amateur usage it no matter too much.
But when you doing millions of HTTP requests daily - your amateur script is completely useless.


Next thing:

Your amateur script isn't able to verify link existence in correct way,
as same as isn't able to detect 30x redirects:

View attachment 121947

Wrong link existence validation:

https://womensdayholiday.com/florist-directory/kings-creek-flowers-2/
http://kings-creek-flowers-gifts-miami.miamidirect.info/
http://directory.miamidirect.info/kings-creek-flowers-gifts_miami-7175-sw-47th-st/

Not detected 30x redirects:

http://kingscreekflowers.com/
http://www.kingscreekflowers.net/
http://www.kingscreekflowersandgifts.net/


To be honest, your amateur script it's more than big joke.
And you offer such extremely low skills as service for BHW members mr @FatBee ?
Stop joking please.

Just don't cry please - we'll continue
Cheers, Greg.

Click to expand...

Don't see any Spreadsheet with all backlinks
Don't see any data about majestic vs ahrefs data accuracy

Job you made using few free tools don't is useless. The same as you words. Irrelevant as usual.
So that's was your system that is able to check thousands backlinks in a minutes. Few domain check in 24 hours. You were the guy who tried to trolled me ?
You are still talking about my script, without knowing a crap about it. Let's talk about yours, we still don't see your "system". You unlike me, advertised it so actively in the begging with "expert" face.

I don't have any reasons to promote my team internal tools. I used it only to prof my database that statistics about database size and relevance doesn't mean nothing, and ahrefs has more relevant data. So I didn't
You are telling about your system


What you now about my script ?
Do you know the queye we use ?
That will be my last word about my script, and I am waiting your system.

Stas Va said:

What ... about my script ?

Click to expand...

Stas Va said:

Don't see any data about majestic vs ahrefs data accuracy

Click to expand...

You should understand that 5 bucks for such script would be a great exaggeration.
Because your script isn't able to verified existing links and detect 30x redirects.
So your team have extremely low ROI.

Stas Va said:

90 (AHREFS) vs 61 (MAJESTIC) (32 % difference).

Click to expand...

As the result your funny script was able to verify ONLY 61 links instead of 287 working links.
Let we do some math now to correct your fake comparison, which based on your funny script:

90 links exists from 1,598 (AHREFS Historic Index) - what mean that ONLY 5.6 % of links exists.
271 links exists from 1,270 (MAJESTIC Historic Index) - what mean that 21.3% of links exists.

Ahrefs was knocked out by Majestic like usually.
Because it have close to 4x more existing links in Historic index.
As I said previously:

GregFromMoonsy said:

Seems Ahrefs Historical Index is more dead than Elvis
Only 90 links exists from 1,598 - what mean 94.4% of shit.

Click to expand...

Cheers, Greg.

While there's no denying that SEMRUSH has come a long way, I think AHREFs crawlers still have en edge over SEMRUSH.

AHREF beats SEMRUSH in terms of content ideas, and discovering RD.

However, SEMRUSH has an edge in terms of giving you an overall stat of the website from the past.

GregFromMoonsy said:

Ahrefs was knocked out by Majestic like usually

Click to expand...

GregFromMoonsy said:

.
Because it have close to 4x more existing links in Historic index.
As I said previously:

Click to expand...

GregFromMoonsy said:

Majestic absolutely crashing Ahrefs close to 50x
What mean, Ahrefs it's the biggest loser in this battle.

Click to expand...

Hmm... seems numbers are falling.

GregFromMoonsy said:

You should understand that 5 bucks for such script would be a great exaggeration.
90 links exists from 1,598 (AHREFS Historic Index) - what mean that ONLY 5.6 % of links exists.
271 links exists from 1,270 (MAJESTIC Historic Index) - what mean that 21.3% of links exists.

Click to expand...

Hmm I understand now. It seems your system needs my system to work. BECAUSE I STILL DON'T see "YOUR" spreadsheet file with full audit from your system.
I'll definitely be back with more prepared and detailed research on this. But will need some preparation to make a clear test for like at least million of backlinks. But I steel don't see your proves, even the fact that your statements in this thread that it will need minutes to check. You already spent significantly more time on writing irrelevant (to our debate) answers. Want to see who wins based on your PROFESSIONAL SYSTEM, not amateurs script. I guess we both are interested in it ? No ?

GregFromMoonsy said:

Without the IP address you aren't able to create the effective queue because:
You trying to crawl the domains which even don't have the DNS A,AAAA,CNAME records or domain was deleted ...

Click to expand...

Already mentioned, we weren't discussing my script in this thread. One more time... I will try to explain.... This "script" was created in 45 minutes after we started debate about ahrefs vs majestic backlinks and historical vs life database. Because it wouldn't be smart to check all backlinks manually, so when my death referrals argument wasn't working. I decided to create a short script to check backlinks existence. I just add few flags to check for the list of domains and few validation conditions, to delete duplicate backlinks from start. So THERE ISn't any type of my script (well actually "wasn't" because it exist now, and even already add upgraded it using Google Safe Browsing test from Google API and some data from Majestic API (decided to prepare a huge database research and need some tests), but initially it was created in the process of our disput) . I never mentioned in the post that I have script before our debate. That's why I for the third of fourth time - tell you, we don't discus about "MY SCRIPT".

"MY SCRIPT" - was a fast way to check Majestic and Ahrefs database on their cleanliness.

I guess it was really bad idea not to use server response in the reports. Because it was a really simple conditions, don't know why created some type $unreacheble variable instead just using server response in the report directly.

Domain Record Flag don't worth it back then...
There was not so much backlinks to check and didn't see any huge problem, using few requests more. Initially I was thinking only about crawling backlink existence there. Because we were debating about relevancy of the database. That is one of the reason why I decided to check small local US website actually.

So I guess now, when you know everything about my & engineering team that is working on it. We will stop talking about MY SCRIPT.

Cshark said:

While there's no denying that SEMRUSH has come a long way, I think AHREFs crawlers still have en edge over SEMRUSH.
AHREF beats SEMRUSH in terms of content ideas, and discovering RD.
However, SEMRUSH has an edge in terms of giving you an overall stat of the website from the past.

Click to expand...

I agree, after next few years disposition between Semrush and Ahrefs historic data will be much less and for content ideas Ahrefs is better now.
However for me personally the higher value have keywords historical data and Adwords historical data from Semrush

Ahrefs have better BL data than Semrush, I am not using Semrush BL at all.
Because Majestic is the best player in this area and crushing Ahrefs when we talking about usability of BL data.

Especially for the reason that Majestic have "TRUST" and "TOPICS" which use Google in current search algorithm.
Instead of funny metrics on domain level.

Cheers, Greg.

GregFromMoonsy said:

I'll check the raw BL data without any filter, as you aren't able to use such filter in Ahrefs

Click to expand...

GregFromMoonsy said:

I'll run my crawlers to verify all BL.

Click to expand...

GregFromMoonsy said:

However, my crawling system is able to check fat thousands urls in few minutes and check each link.
So, for professionals it's not the problem at all.

Click to expand...

It feels you also don't like to waste your time to response to your own words.
Goodbye Talking Head.

GregFromMoonsy said:

I don't like wasting the time on such kids and trolls.
Goodbye @Stas Va

Click to expand...

Stas Va said:

It feels you also don't like to waste your time to response to your own words.
Goodbye Talking Head.

Click to expand...

And that concludes the contest. Seriously guys, there's no point arguing. Ahrefs is the best. Matthew Woodward did a test with 4 million domains and the results were very convincing: https://www.matthewwoodward.co.uk/seo/tools/best-backlink-checker/

Here's another smaller test from Backlinko that declared Ahrefs the winner: https://backlinko.com/best-backlink-checker

So, stop wasting time arguing when the winner is clear.

@assaultclass

You should understand that Matthew Woodward NEVER publish nothing what not was paid OR what not have the affiliate program.
If you rely on people like Matthew or Brian - I can only congrat.

Also Brian is the person who even don't know that Google use PageRank.
Nice "SEO expert" to follow

assaultclass said:

...the winner is clear.

Click to expand...

This is what I said many posts earlier: Ahrefs is for the beginners, Majestic + Semrush are for professionals.

GregFromMoonsy said:

At first, Majestic have topics, which also is used by Google (aka topic distance)
For second, Majestic have trust metric, which also is used by Google (even in similar way)
For third, Majestic have the biggest link history data.

But Majestic haven't any keywords data.
And this is the place, where Semrush come into the action with the biggest keywords history data.
Semrush also have link data, but it's very poor.

Ahrefs have limited keywords data and haven't the topics and trust metric.
However when we consider the cost of Majestic + Semrush - Ahrefs is much cheaper but without very important metrics.

For the above reasons professionals use team Majestic + Semrush.

Click to expand...

Cheers, Greg.

assaultclass said:

And that concludes the contest. Seriously guys, there's no point arguing. Ahrefs is the best. Matthew Woodward did a test with 4 million domains and the results were very convincing: https://www.matthewwoodward.co.uk/seo/tools/best-backlink-checker/

Here's another smaller test from Backlinko that declared Ahrefs the winner: https://backlinko.com/best-backlink-checker

So, stop wasting time arguing when the winner is clear.

Click to expand...

For sure @GregFromMoonsy was speculating comparing "found urls" and "crawled pages" an his x50 size difference.

GregFromMoonsy said:

@FatBee

Maybe you not finished any school and for this reason it's very hard to you compare really big numbers such:

8 485 618 151 026 Majestic pages in index
149 000 000 000 Ahrefs pages in index

And OK, Ahrefs in your opinion have biggest index, mr mathematic/seo guru FatBee
In reality you are not able even to compare such big numbers, what you confirmed.

Really, I am tired from such beginners who repeating only the myths.
Because I am based on facts not the fake propaganda as you love.

Cheers, Greg.

Click to expand...

GregFromMoonsy said:

Reality:


Majestic absolutely crashing Ahrefs close to 50x
What mean, Ahrefs it's the biggest loser in this battle.

Seems you don't know mathematics same as @FatBee
Also fresh registered profile - just today, wow

Cheers, Greg.

Click to expand...

But I actually started to ignore it long time ago, also he was smart enough to pretend he didn't seen this accusation and never said that.

But to be fair what we were trying to check is the database relevancy, not size.
Because if you even will do a short validation for the backlinks that those tools are showing, some part of them are duplicates, huge part of them are outdated even if we will check fresh and live index. So what I want to research now, how much real existing backlinks contains Ahrefs vs Majestic vs Semrush. So this conversation wasn't completely useless.

Cheers, Greg.

GregFromMoonsy said:

To definitely finish the myth that Ahrefs have the "biggest" Fresh Index, some facts on image bellow (unnecessary parts was cutted)
Also Ahrefs measure BL index in number of servers - they are "professionals" without any doubts ​

With 478 Billions crawled urls Majestic knocking out Ahrefs (with poor 297 billions pages in index)
Where term "pages in index" not even mean that they was crawled by Ahrefs.​

View attachment 121989​

View attachment 121990​

Ahrefs is the biggest loser, like usually when we talking about BL.
However some people who aren't able to compare such numbers will say something other.
Including Tim Soulo from Ahrefs.​

"Honesty is a very expensive gift,
Don’t expect it from cheap people."​

Cheers, Greg.

Click to expand...

Stas Va said:

Also can you please tell me, do you feel difference between "pages in index" and "url found"...
Do you understand the concept behind URL ?

For example:
http://site.com/page site.com/page
https://site.com/page?utm_content=b...l&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer
https://site.com/page?utm_content=b..._source=linkedin.com&utm_campaign=GregIsWrong
https://site.com/page

Are those pages different, and what you will tell about URLs ?

Please share your "professional" experience...
What you can tell about internal links, .... do they also have URLs ?

WHY I'M ASKING ? Because it's interesting why "professional" like you compares two absolute different concepts?

You even didn't use statics about "crawled" URLs. You decided to choose the biggest number in Majestic statistics, and compare with the lowest in Ahrefs statistic (except domains).
Do you see the difference between "crawled" and "found" ? Great technique for slippy salesman.

I think fake Mythbusters for our industry is way much more dangerous than the myths themselves.
Professional ? Stop trying to seem like, just be one.

Click to expand...

That's hilarious.