Evaluating Back Links

I have had some douche or douche's try to spam back link my site. I think some of it is on an automated database somewhere and the domains come and go over a matter of months. One will be there for six months to a year and generate 2000 to 5000 back links to my specific pages on my site and then disappear while another reappears and the cycle continues. I always disavow these turds when they first appear but they continue to pop up and the cycle continues relentlessly.

During this process, I have come up with my own method of evaluating all the back links that appear in Google Webmaster tools. I usually see Google reporting new back links every 4 to 6 days. I go through all these new links and find the turds and disavow them. My method is this (and I am hoping someone else will share some insight on my method and hopefully share some additional insight):

First, I take the base domain (not the entire URL) and check in Majestic. If I get a decent ratio between TF and CF close to one then I mark it as a keeper. I also check the URL and domain in MOZ. Anything above a 15 DA and PA is a keeper.

I also navigate to the site and check it to see if the anchor text is valid or just some spammy crap. Odd names used in the anchor text are automatically disavowed.

I do struggle with the back links that get a great ratio on Majestic but not look good in MOZ and vice versa.

Anyone share any insight on this method and maybe an additional way to evaluate quality back links that help the site? Maybe the referring domains of the back link have something to do with it also?

Thanks in advance for any insight you may have!!

I do not really see anything wrong with what you are doing. My comments are:
- you can also use ahrefs for easy monitoring of your backlinks, and they may report more than google,
- the ratio TF/CF is not important in itself, RD, DA, TF are the ones to look at.

Avoid any site that exists within a spammy link neighborhood. Use a backlink tool like Majestic or Open Site Explorer to examine a site's backlinks.Consider authority and trust signals as you evaluate link prospects, because links are endorsements online, and you should want to be in good company.

If I get a decent ratio between TF and CF close to one then I mark it as a keeper

Click to expand...

Not needed at all, don't pay any attention to CF nor CF TF ratio overall. That doesn't make or break the domain.

I also check the URL and domain in MOZ. Anything above a 15 DA and PA is a keeper.

Click to expand...

Anything from MOZ is a plague, especially PA DA bullshit. You will do much better in the long run without paying attention to that.

I also navigate to the site and check it to see if the anchor text is valid or just some spammy crap.

Click to expand...

Correct.

I do struggle with the back links that get a great ratio on Majestic but not look good in MOZ and vice versa.

Click to expand...

Ignore MOZ and you are all good.


Overall, focus on RD. That's the best rule of thumb there is.

For more info, also read this - https://www.blackhatworld.com/seo/c...osts-metrics-spam-and-niche-relevancy.916518/

get some high tf backlinks only from unique RD one link from one domain tf should atleast 10+ each look if your site gets some tf numbers may be it helps ps i am not expert anyone can disagree.

Thanks for all the replies!! I appreciate as it helps sharpen my skills.

In addition to what others have said, the most important thing is to track your rankings in the SERPs directly. If your rankings are staying steady or increasing (you might track this with something like SERPBook), then you should be fine without obsessively disavowing backlinks in WMT.

GSA blasting spam links with buy Viagra anchor text is one of the oldest and cheapest tricks in the book, which Google is certainly aware of. A lot of these links built with low-effort NSEO attempts can end up being devalued (no effect positive or negative) rather than having a negative impact on your website.

HighPerformance said:

I do struggle with the back links that get a great ratio on Majestic but not look good in MOZ and vice versa.

Click to expand...

Agreed with @Nargil that MOZ is garbage.

PA/DA measure number of links and don't take into account quality of links. If you want to see this in action, set up a free blog on Weebly/Joomla/whatever and then go to the marketplace, give it a $5 GSA blast, then wait for eternity for MOZ to update. PA will increase drastically. Majestic's TF metric has limitations, but is much better at taking quality into account. Run that same web 2.0 through majestic and it should have a very high CF, while the TF will be mostly unaffected by the GSA blast.

As mentioned previously, you probably don't need to worry too much about it unless your rankings are being hurt directly.

At the scale you've mentioned of 2000 to 5000 spam backlinks, it's going to be a huge timesink to actually do a meaningful check on each backlink, which would generally include manually reviewing the webpage and other time-consuming analysis, such as running the page through archive.org to check to see if the site was built on a previously spammed domain. If you're going to take the time to disavow spam backlinks at all, disavow all of them and be done with it. Although it's questionable whether disavowing backlinks even does anything.