1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

[How To] tell if you can blast a website

Discussion in 'Black Hat SEO' started by YellowHats, Nov 11, 2013.

  1. YellowHats

    YellowHats Junior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2013
    Messages:
    195
    Likes Received:
    135
    Occupation:
    Director of SEO
    Location:
    Middle East
    Not so small explanation of a small metric I use which has helped me a lot before. Many of you who work on sites that aren't completely blackhat may have hit the point when due to penguin and whatever the hell else, you have become fearful of link-building, worrying that too many of this or that will cause you a penalty.

    If you pop any website into Majestic SEO, two of the numbers it will give you are "Citation Flow" and "Trust Flow." Citation Flow basically means raw link power. If you build eleven billion links all from article directories or blog comments from crappy websites, your citation flow will still go up. Trust flow is a measure of the level of trust your links bring. If you build links from strong trusted domains like Yahoo, Examiner, CNN, your trust flow will go up.

    Russ Jones wrote a post on Moz about research he and his company did - http://moz.com/blog/its-penguin-hunting-season-how-to-be-the-predator-not-the-prey. They tried to develop a tool that would predict whether or not your site is at risk of a penalty and:

    For example:
    • If your site has a citation flow of 45 but a trust flow of 19, that's highly unbalanced and you should quickly find "trusted" links.
    • If your trust flow is 30 and your citation flow is 24, you probably have some leeway and can do some less fearful link-building, services, whatever - just to get you more power.
    • Same thing goes for MozRank vs MozTrust.

    I have been using this technique to gauge how balanced my sites are for several months. It has worked very well. The sites I have that were hit by Penguin had a much higher citation flow than trust flow. There is no need to freak out though if you have a citation flow that's a little higher than your trust flow - that's probably totally fine. It's more making sure you're not wildly out of balance.

    This helps a lot for types of links and quantity of links and stuff like that. It does not, at all, however - take into account anchor text variation, platform diversity, etc. You could theoretically get a good trust flow / citation flow ratio using only blog comments all with the same anchor text. However, it is a highly useful metric if you want to try and understand how hard you can push your site.

    Last note - majestic SEO does not crawl very quickly. If you have done a lot of link building in the past couple weeks, what you see there may not reflect the current situation. Hope that helps or at least gives some food for thought...

    EDIT: Title of the post is misleading. I am against blasting. Unless it's a blackhat site, I never xrumer or senuke or fiverr or anything like that. What I mean is more "less fearful" link-building. If your trust flow outweighs your citation flow, you can step up your link-building (reasonably) and not worry about only highly relevant, high PR, etc...
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 8
    Last edited: Nov 11, 2013
  2. Veyron

    Veyron BANNED BANNED

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2013
    Messages:
    1,452
    Likes Received:
    1,297
    Blasting a site in my opinion is never good regardless of the circumstances. Blasting a site will look very unnatural and will more than likely result in a penalty. I'm surprised that people are still even considering link blasts after the updates we've seen and we've all seen countless threads where people have lost all of their rankings over this.

    Veyron
     
  3. YellowHats

    YellowHats Junior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2013
    Messages:
    195
    Likes Received:
    135
    Occupation:
    Director of SEO
    Location:
    Middle East
    I edited the post based on your comment. When I said blasting, I didn't really mean BLASTING. I never xrumer, senuke, etc. What I mean is when these metrics are in your favor you can be more aggressive, slightly less picky, etc.

     
  4. Veyron

    Veyron BANNED BANNED

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2013
    Messages:
    1,452
    Likes Received:
    1,297
    Yes if the "metrics" are in your favor, then you may be slightly more aggressive on your link building however you should still be cautious in making sure you make your link building look as natural as possible because triggering a manual review or site penalty seems to be getting easier and easier and it's not worth taking a chance on losing rankings if you don't need to.

    But, if you're experienced with link building and SEO, then by all means, do whatever it is you deem necessary or safe and you should be fine.

    Veyron
     
  5. assphuck

    assphuck Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2009
    Messages:
    1,196
    Likes Received:
    905
    Good analysis and a foundation for people to work on. Thanks for sharing this with us.
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  6. ethanmitchel

    ethanmitchel Regular Member

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2011
    Messages:
    355
    Likes Received:
    121
    Thank you!, do you have a "standard" of what a good citation flow/ trust flow would be?, is it based on a 1-100 scale?
     
  7. YellowHats

    YellowHats Junior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2013
    Messages:
    195
    Likes Received:
    135
    Occupation:
    Director of SEO
    Location:
    Middle East
    No problem - MajesticSEO is on a 1-100, Moz I think is 1-10, but I'm not sure.

    I don't have a standard. I try to keep it close to at least 1:1.

    My blackhat sites which got hit by Penguin had a citation / trust of 25/7 and 41/20 (So between 2:1 to 3.5:1). The other sites I work with vary between something like 1.2:1 to 1:1.2. But I'm by no means saying that that's what needs to be done

    For reference...

    Yahoo
    Trust - 82
    Citation - 70

    Twitter
    Trust - 95
    Citation - 92

     
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
    Last edited: Nov 12, 2013