SEO
Stick a Fork in Them; They’re Done
In 2022, I think you can say the same thing about expert roundups.
I’ll explain why below. But first, let’s make sure we’re on the same page…
Expert roundups are blog posts that feature quotes from industry experts about a specific topic.
For example, below is a roundup of SEO tips. You can see that it features quotes from 30+ experts, including some extremely well-known faces like Glen Allsopp and our very own Tim Soulo:
In my opinion, there are three main reasons:
- Exposure
- Backlinks
- Relationships
But rather than just share my opinion on the matter, I polled my Twitter followers.
Here are the results of the poll:
if you’ve ever produced an expert roundup, what was your primary aim with that?
— Joshua Hardwick (@JoshuaCHardwick) March 9, 2022
Let’s take a look at the results in more detail.
Backlinks
According to my poll, backlinks are the top reason for creating an expert roundup—with 43.9% of folks citing it as their primary aim.
The idea here is simple: If an “expert” is willing to contribute to your roundup, perhaps they’ll also be willing to link to it. This is good for SEO because backlinks are one of Google’s top-ranking factors.
Building relationships
Building relationships is the second most popular reason for creating an expert roundup, with 36.8% citing it as their primary aim.
This makes sense, as building relationships with influential and well-connected industry experts can open all kinds of doors. It’s how I managed to get a backlink from Glen Allsopp (Detailed) back in the day, and it’s kind of how I landed my job at Ahrefs.
Exposure
Exposure is the least popular reason for creating an expert roundup, with only 19.3% of respondents citing it as their primary aim.
People tend to share content that paints them in a positive light. So the idea with expert roundups is that, once published, many of the featured “experts” will share the post on social media and your blog will get some nice exposure.
It’s basically egobait. You’re literally referring to these people as experts in your content, so why wouldn’t they want to share it?
I also got a reply to my tweet from Jeremy Rivera, who gave a fourth reason for creating expert roundups: crafting expert-supported content:
You forgot a fourth objective; crafting quality expert supported content.
A well executed roundup can and should actually achieve ALL of these objectives!
— Jeremy Rivera (@JeremyRiveraSEO) March 9, 2022
This makes sense. But personally, I’m not convinced the “expert roundup” format is usually the best way to do this. (More on this later.)
Given that most “experts” are already well connected, they’re probably not contributing to roundups to build relationships. They’re almost certainly doing it for backlinks.
But again, let’s not trust my opinion…
I polled my Twitter followers. Here are the results:
if you’ve ever *contributed* (i.e., given a quote) to an expert roundup, what was your primary aim with that?
— Joshua Hardwick (@JoshuaCHardwick) March 11, 2022
No prizes for guessing the outcome here. I think it’s pretty much what we all expected.
Sidenote.
This poll attracted fewer votes than my first, so take the results with a pinch of salt. However, in my opinion, backlinks are the number one reason to get involved in expert roundups.
Expert roundups have no real downsides for contributors. It rarely takes more than a few minutes to answer the creator’s question and, in return, they get exposure, a backlink, and a nice egoboost.
For example, here’s my contribution to an expert roundup. I was asked to name my top three keyword research tools:
In this case, replying to an email with six words landed me a mention and backlink on a DR71 site. The post I’m featured in now gets an estimated 284 organic monthly visits:
But for the creators and readers of roundups, there are a few issues…
1. It can be hard to get enough actual experts to contribute
In the early days of expert roundups, someone reaching out and asking for your contribution made you feel special because it didn’t happen often. Now, everyone is creating expert roundups, and genuine experts are inundated with requests.
This means they have to pick and choose which ones to contribute to, making things harder for publishers to get the quotes they need.
As a result, some publishers seem willing to accept quotes from, well, pretty much anyone.
Just look at this expert quote in a recent roundup I found about link building tactics:
Really? The best strategy for building backlinks is blog commenting, where 99% of links are nofollowed and almost certainly won’t pass much “authority” either way?
I can’t imagine anyone close to being a link building expert saying this in the last 10 years.
Sidenote.
I changed the wording of the quote above slightly, but the gist is the same. I did this because I don’t want to pick on anyone, and I know you savvy SEOs can easily find the exact quote.
Now, I hold no grudges against the person who gave this quote. They were clearly asked and thought “why not?” But the reality is that including these kinds of quotes leads to a deterioration in the perceived quality of expert roundups over time—which further dissuades experts from contributing.
It’s a vicious cycle, and it’s why expert roundups have (in my opinion) become so spammy in recent years.
2. The format rarely aligns with search intent
People are typically looking to do one of three things when they type something into Google:
- Buy something
- Learn something
- Get somewhere (i.e., a specific website)
You may think that an expert roundup matches search intent when the searcher is looking to learn, but let me ask you this: How often do you really want a list of hundreds of random and potentially opposing opinions when you’re just trying to find the answer to something?
Probably not very often, which is why expert roundups are rarely an optimal content format if you want to rank high on Google.
3. Experts rarely link to roundups they’re featured in
If you’re publishing an expert roundup with the aim of attracting backlinks from contributors’ websites, I have bad news: Most experts probably aren’t going to link to your roundup.
How do I know? I cross-referenced the external links and referring domains to an expert roundup we published in 2015 to see how many of the featured experts linked to the roundup. I found the result to be 21%—or roughly 1 in 5.
That may not sound too shabby, but you have to remember a few things:
- We published this post when expert roundups were arguably at the height of their popularity.
- Pretty much everyone in the SEO industry wants to be featured on the Ahrefs blog, so being featured in our roundup is something to shout about.
- We already had relationships with many of the people who linked to us.
In other words, in 2022, unless you’re a well-known brand, this number is almost certainly going to be much lower.
My opinion: You may get 1 in 10 contributors to link to you—if you’re lucky.
4. Experts rarely share roundups they’re featured in
You’d think that sharing the roundup on Twitter would be a no-brainer for those featured. But it seems that very few do this either. I checked Twitter, and only a handful of those featured in our expert roundup appear to have shared it.
Even if they do, the reality is that their share is unlikely to send much (if any) traffic our way.
Don’t believe me? Here’s the number of link clicks a recent tweet of mine got:
Again, the numbers may not look too bad. But here’s what it took to get those clicks:
- 8,000+ followers
- Retweets from the official Ahrefs account and two of my colleagues, which exposed my tweet to a further 135,000+ people.
Of course, true experts tend to have lots of followers too, but they rarely have the amplification of big brands like Ahrefs behind them.
All in all, it’s unlikely that you’ll get more than a handful of clicks from experts sharing your post on social media.
Expert roundups may have had their day, but there are still ways to utilize expert contributions to improve content and SEO. You just need to be a little more creative and put in more effort. Let’s look at a few ideas.
1. Interview an expert and write up their insights
If you want to write about a topic but lack the expertise to do so, consider interviewing an expert and writing up their insights.
This is precisely what we did for our post about Google penalties.
Having limited experience with Google penalties ourselves, we interviewed three experts on the topic, including Marie Haynes. We then compiled their knowledge and insights into a guide.
There are a few benefits to this approach:
- You can still match search intent – As you’re writing up expert insights, you’re free to use any content format you like. If search intent calls for a list of tips, you can write a list of tips. If it calls for a guide, you can write a guide.
- You improve E‑A-T – E‑A-T stands for expertise, authoritativeness, and trustworthiness. It’s what Google’s human quality raters use to assess the quality of search results. It’s not a direct ranking factor, but improving and demonstrating E‑A-T can lead to many SEO benefits.
- Your expert is arguably more likely to share the content – Being included in an expert roundup among dozens of others may give you a bit of an egoboost, but having a piece centered almost entirely around your knowledge and insights will surely give you a bigger one. This will, thus, increase the chances of experts sharing the content.
If you’re not sure who to interview for your piece, run a search in Ahrefs’ Content Explorer.
The tool is a searchable database of over 9 billion pages, and it has authorship information for some of them. This means you can run a search to find prolific writers on a topic.
For example, if we want to write a piece about Google’s Knowledge Graph, we can search Content Explorer for the pages with “knowledge graph” in their titles.
If we then go to the “Authors” tab, we’ll see the names of authors who’ve published the most pages matching our search.
Here, we can see that Aaron Bradley has authored 12 pages with “knowledge graph” in each page’s title:
If we click on the number of pages, we can see everything he’s written on the topic:
This guy clearly knows his stuff, so he is a fantastic person to interview for our article.
2. Poll experts for interesting stats
People often cite statistics and link to the source. If you don’t believe us, just look at the anchors and surrounding texts of backlinks to our search traffic study:
You can see that pretty much all of the links are from folks citing statistics on our page.
If you’re lucky enough to have access to unique data and insights as we are, publishing content laden with statistics is easy—and you’ll naturally earn backlinks as a result. But if you don’t have in-house data, a good way to create unique statistics is to poll experts.
This is precisely what Paddy Moogan did for Aira’s annual “state of link building” report.
He polled 250 digital marketing professionals and consolidated their responses into graphs like this:
The result? Backlinks from 346 referring domains and counting.
If you’re wondering who to poll for this kind of content, use Content Explorer to find experts who’ve already written about your topic.
For example, here are a few top authors who’ve written about link building (you may notice a familiar name there!):
TIP
Maximize the link-earning potential of existing posts by adding insights from your poll. For example, we mentioned a statistic from our search traffic study in our keyword research guide, and it earned a few extra backlinks as a result:
3. Poll experts for product recommendations
Most affiliate websites make their money by ranking for general comparison keywords, i.e., “best [product category].”
Unfortunately, to create truly useful content for these keywords, you usually have to test and review dozens of products yourself. Not only is this costly, but you’re also basing your recommendations on one person’s opinion—which may not align with the consensus of others.
One solution to this is to poll experts for their recommendations.
This is precisely what Robbie Richards did in his post about the “best link building tools.” He asked 82 link builders to vote for their favorite link building tool, tallied up the results, and recommended their favorite to his audience:
You can use this approach for non-affiliate keywords too.
For example, we polled the 10,000+ SEO professionals in our private Facebook group to compile recommendations for our list of the best free SEO tools.
Final thoughts
Expert roundups, in the traditional sense, are dead unless you have clout. And even then, these roundups are less effective than they once were. But by creatively using experts to source information, you can still apply some of the same principles to enhance your content, earn more backlinks, and get organic traffic.
Got questions? Disagree? Let me know on Twitter.
SEO
How SEO Can Capture Demand You Create Elsewhere
Generating demand is about making people want stuff they had no desire to buy before encountering your marketing.
Sometimes, it’s a short-term play, like an ecommerce store creating buzz before launching a new product. Other times, like with B2B marketing, it’s a long-term play to engage out-of-market audiences.
In either situation, demand generation can quickly become an expensive marketing activity.
Here are some ways SEO can help you capture and retain the demand you’re generating so your marketing budget goes further.
There’s no right or wrong way to generate demand. Any marketing activity that generates a desire to buy something (where there wasn’t such a desire before) can be considered demand generation.
Common examples include using:
- Paid ads
- Word of mouth
- Social media
- Video marketing
- Email newsletters
- Content marketing
- Community marketing
For example, Pryshan is a small local brand in Australia that has created a new type of exfoliating stone from clay. They’ve been selling it offline since 2018, if not earlier.
It’s not a groundbreaking innovation, but it’s also not been done before.
To launch their product online, they started running a bunch of Facebook ads:
Because of their ads, this company is in the early stages of generating demand for its product. Sure, it’s not the type of marketing that will go viral, but it’s still a great example of demand gen.
Looking at search volume data, there are 40 searches per month for the keyword “clay stone exfoliator” in Australia and a handful of other related searches:
However, these same keywords get hardly any searches in the US:
This never happens.
Australia has a much smaller population than the US. For non-localized searches, Australian search volume is usually about 6-10% of US search volume for the same keywords.
Take a look at the most popular searches as an example:
Pryshan’s advertising efforts on other platforms directly create the search demand for exfoliating clay stones.
It doesn’t matter where or how you educate people about the product you sell. What matters is shifting their perceptions from cognitive awareness to emotional desire.
Emotions trigger actions, and usually, the first action people take once they become aware of a cool new thing is to Google it.
If you’re not including SEO as part of your marketing efforts, here are three things you can do to:
- minimize budget wastage
- capture interest when people search
- convert the audiences you’re already reaching
If you’re working hard to create demand for your product, make sure it’s easy for people to discover it when they search Google.
- Give it a simple name that’s easy to remember
- Label it according to how people naturally search
- Avoid any terms that create ambiguities with an existing thing
For example, the concept of a clay exfoliating stone is easy for people to remember.
Even if they don’t remember what Pryshan calls their product, they’ll remember the videos and images they saw of the product being used to exfoliate people’s skin. They’ll remember it’s made from clay instead of a more common material like pumice.
It makes sense for Pryshan to call its product something similar to what people will be inclined to search for.
In this example, however, the context of exfoliation is important.
If Pryshan chooses to call its product “clay stones,” it will have a harder time disambiguating itself from gardening products in search results. It’s already the odd one out in SERPs for such keywords:
When you go through your branding exercises to decide what to call your product or innovation, it helps to search your ideas on Google.
This way, you’ll easily see what phrases to avoid so that your product isn’t being grouped with unrelated things.
Imagine being part of a company that invested a lot of money in re-branding itself. New logo, new slogan, new marketing materials… the lot.
On the back of their new business cards, the designers thought inviting people to search for the new slogan on Google would be clever.
The only problem was that this company didn’t rank for the slogan.
They weren’t showing up at all! (Yes, it’s a true story, no I can’t share the brand’s name).
This tactic isn’t new. Many businesses leverage the fact that people will Google things to convert offline audiences into online audiences through their printed, radio, and TV ads.
Don’t do this if you don’t already own the search results page.
It’s not only a very expensive mistake to make, but it gives the conversions you’ve worked hard for directly to your competitors.
Instead, use SEO to become the only brand people see when they search for your brand, product, or something that you’ve created.
Let’s use Pryshan as an example.
They’re the first brand to create exfoliating clay stones. Their audience has created a few new keywords to find Pryshan’s products on Google, with “clay stone exfoliator” being the most popular variation.
Yet even though it’s a product they’ve brought to market, competitors and retailers are already encroaching on their SERP real estate for this keyword:
Sure, Pryshan holds four of the organic spots, but it’s not enough.
Many competitors are showing up in the paid product carousel before Pryshan’s website can be seen by searchers:
They’re already paying for Facebook ads, why not consider some paid Google placements too?
Not to mention, stockists and competitors are ranking for three of the other organic positions.
Having stockists show up for your product may not seem so bad, but if you’re not careful, they may undercut your prices or completely edge you out of the SERPs.
This is also a common tactic used by affiliate marketers to earn commissions from brands that are not SEO-savvy.
In short, SEO can help you protect your brand presence on Google.
If you’re working hard to generate demand for a cool new thing that’s never been done before, it can be hard to know if it’s working.
Sure, you can measure sales. But a lot of the time, demand generation doesn’t turn into immediate sales.
B2B marketing is a prominent example. Educating and converting out-of-market audiences into in-market prospects can take a long time.
That’s where SEO data can help close the gap and give you data to get more buy-in from decision-makers.
Measure increases in branded searches
A natural byproduct of demand generation activities is that people search more for your brand (or they should if you’re doing it right).
Tracking if your branded keywords improve over time can help you gauge how your demand generation efforts are going.
In Ahrefs, you can use Rank Tracker to monitor how many people discover your website from your branded searches and whether these are trending up:
If your brand is big enough and gets hundreds of searches a month, you can also check out this nifty graph that forecasts search potential in Keywords Explorer:
Discover and track new keywords about your products, services or innovations
If, as part of your demand generation strategy, you’re encouraging people to search for new keywords relating to your product, service, or innovation, set up alerts to monitor your presence for those terms.
This method will also help you uncover the keywords your audience naturally uses anyway.
Start by going to Ahrefs Alerts and setting up a new keyword alert.
Add your website.
Leave the volume setting untouched (you want to include low search volume keywords so you discover the new searches people make).
Set your preferred email frequency, and voila, you’re done.
Monitor visibility against competitors
If you’re worried other brands may steal your spotlight in Google’s search results, you can also use Ahrefs to monitor your share of the traffic compared to them.
I like to use the Share of Voice graph in Site Explorer to do this. It looks like this:
This graph is a great bird’s eye view of how you stack up against competitors and if you’re at risk of losing visibility to any of them.
Final thoughts
As SEO professionals, it’s easy to forget how hard some businesses work to generate demand for their products or services.
Demand always comes first, and it’s our job to capture it.
It’s not a chicken or egg scenario. The savviest marketers use this to their advantage by creating their own SEO opportunities long before competitors figure out what they’re doing.
If you’ve seen other great examples of how SEO and demand generation work together, share them with me on LinkedIn anytime.
SEO
Google Explains How Cumulative Layout Shift (CLS) Is Measured
Google’s Web Performance Developer Advocate, Barry Pollard, has clarified how Cumulative Layout Shift (CLS) is measured.
CLS quantifies how much unexpected layout shift occurs when a person browses your site.
This metric matters to SEO as it’s one of Google’s Core Web Vitals. Pages with low CLS scores provide a more stable experience, potentially leading to better search visibility.
How is it measured? Pollard addressed this question in a thread on X.
For Core Web Vitals what is CLS measured in? Why is 0.1 considered not good and 0.25 bad, and what do those numbers represent?
I’ve had 3 separate conversations on this with various people in last 24 hours so figured it’s time for another deep dive thread to explain…
🧵 1/12 pic.twitter.com/zZoTur6Ad4
— Barry Pollard (@tunetheweb) October 10, 2024
Understanding CLS Measurement
Pollard began by explaining the nature of CLS measurement:
“CLS is ‘unitless’ unlike LCP and INP which are measured in seconds/milliseconds.”
He further clarified:
“Each layout shift is calculated by multipyling two percentages or fractions together: What moved (impact fraction) How much it moved (distance fraction).”
This calculation method helps quantify the severity of layout shifts.
As Pollard explained:
“The whole viewport moves all the way down – that’s worse than just half the view port moving all the way down. The whole viewport moving down a little? That’s not as bad as the whole viewport moving down a lot.”
Worse Case Scenario
Pollard described the worst-case scenario for a single layout shift:
“The maximum layout shift is if 100% of the viewport (impact fraction = 1.0) is moved one full viewport down (distance fraction = 1.0).
This gives a layout shift score of 1.0 and is basically the worst type of shift.”
However, he reminds us of the cumulative nature of CLS:
“CLS is Cumulative Layout Shift, and that first word (cumulative) matters. We take all the individual shifts that happen within a short space of time (max 5 seconds) and sum them up to get the CLS score.”
Pollard explained the reasoning behind the 5-second measurement window:
“Originally we cumulated ALL the shifts, but that didn’t really measure the UX—especially for pages opened for a long time (think SPAs or email). Measuring all shifts meant, given enough, time even the best pages would fail!”
He also noted the theoretical maximum CLS score:
“Since each element can only shift when a frame is drawn and we have a 5 second cap and most devices run at 60fps, that gives a theoretical cap on CLS of 5 secs * 60 fps * 1.0 max shift = 300.”
Interpreting CLS Scores
Pollard addressed how to interpret CLS scores:
“… it helps to think of CLS as a percentage of movement. The good threshold of 0.1 means about the page moved 10%—which could mean the whole page moved 10%, or half the page moved 20%, or lots of little movements were equivalent to either of those.”
Regarding the specific threshold values, Pollard explained:
“So why is 0.1 ‘good’ and 0.25 ‘poor’? That’s explained here as was a combination of what we’d want (CLS = 0!) and what is achievable … 0.05 was actually achievable at the median, but for many sites it wouldn’t be, so went slightly higher.”
See also: How You Can Measure Core Web Vitals
Why This Matters
Pollard’s insights provide web developers and SEO professionals with a clearer understanding of measuring and optimizing for CLS.
As you work with CLS, keep these points in mind:
- CLS is unitless and calculated from impact and distance fractions.
- It’s cumulative, measuring shifts over a 5-second window.
- The “good” threshold of 0.1 roughly equates to 10% of viewport movement.
- CLS scores can exceed 1.0 due to multiple shifts adding up.
- The thresholds (0.1 for “good”, 0.25 for “poor”) balance ideal performance with achievable goals.
With this insight, you can make adjustments to achieve Google’s threshold.
Featured Image: Piscine26/Shutterstock
SEO
The 50 Best Bootstrapped Backlink Builders in 2024
We analyzed the organic growth of 1,600 SaaS companies to discover the SEO strategies that work best in 2024.
In this article, we’re looking at bootstrapped SaaS companies that gained the greatest amount of referring domains in the past year.
Bootstrapped businesses generally don’t have huge budgets to spend on marketing, so any strategy these small-but-mighty companies use to improve their organic growth is something that you can take inspiration from, too.
- We used the Ahrefs API to pull a list of live referring domains for each company in September 2023 and September 2024.
- Companies were ranked by referring domain growth as a percentage of their initial referring domains. We’ve set a minimum starting threshold of 1,000 referring domains.
- We’ve reported on referring domains instead of backlinks, because 1,000 referring domains are much, much harder to get than 1,000 backlinks.
Rank | Company | Referring Domains 2023 | Referring Domains 2024 | Referring Domain Growth | Change | Estimated Revenue |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Elfsight | 7,657 | 33,610 | 25,953 | 339% | $8.0M |
2 | Short.io | 5,709 | 18,573 | 12,864 | 225% | $0.5M |
3 | Gymdesk | 1,325 | 3,052 | 1,727 | 130% | $5.5M |
4 | Helpjuice | 4,015 | 8,672 | 4,657 | 116% | $6.0M |
5 | AlsoAsked | 1,602 | 3,343 | 1,741 | 109% | $0.5M |
6 | Stripo | 2,304 | 4,420 | 2,116 | 92% | $5.5M |
7 | Clearscope | 1,883 | 3,580 | 1,697 | 90% | $5.5M |
8 | Surfer | 5,815 | 10,899 | 5,084 | 87% | $37.5M |
9 | Wordtune | 2,877 | 5,347 | 2,470 | 86% | $1.0M |
10 | Crowdin | 4,818 | 8,919 | 4,101 | 85% | $17.5M |
11 | Socialinsider | 3,264 | 6,007 | 2,743 | 84% | $0.8M |
12 | SpyFu | 8,101 | 14,821 | 6,720 | 83% | $2.0M |
13 | Pentest-Tools.com | 1,543 | 2,779 | 1,236 | 80% | $5.5M |
14 | Canny | 4,411 | 7,675 | 3,264 | 74% | $5.5M |
15 | Surfshark | 13,898 | 24,056 | 10,158 | 73% | $20.0M |
16 | Sitebulb | 1,232 | 2,093 | 861 | 70% | $0.5M |
17 | Seobility | 3,496 | 5,900 | 2,404 | 69% | $5.0M |
18 | SpyCloud | 1,192 | 1,987 | 795 | 67% | $14.0M |
19 | MxToolbox | 10,718 | 17,736 | 7,018 | 65% | $9.0M |
20 | Shiftbase | 1,077 | 1,780 | 703 | 65% | $17.5M |
21 | Signaturely | 1,113 | 1,839 | 726 | 65% | $0.5M |
22 | Lemlist | 1,613 | 2,654 | 1,041 | 65% | $6.0M |
23 | Sitechecker | 5,938 | 9,732 | 3,794 | 64% | $6.1M |
24 | SavvyCal | 1,272 | 2,070 | 798 | 63% | $5.5M |
25 | Statusbrew | 2,750 | 4,470 | 1,720 | 63% | $14.0M |
26 | Wisepops | 1,291 | 2,086 | 795 | 62% | $3.0M |
27 | Glassnode | 5,041 | 8,123 | 3,082 | 61% | $5.5M |
28 | DeviceAtlas | 2,765 | 4,442 | 1,677 | 61% | $19.0M |
29 | Float.com | 1,021 | 1,638 | 617 | 60% | $5.5M |
30 | RTINGS.com | 8,601 | 13,779 | 5,178 | 60% | $6.3M |
31 | Smallpdf | 13,953 | 22,264 | 8,311 | 60% | $17.5M |
32 | Clockify | 6,109 | 9,733 | 3,624 | 59% | $5.5M |
33 | Mailtrap | 3,162 | 4,991 | 1,829 | 58% | $5.5M |
34 | BambooHR | 8,511 | 13,410 | 4,899 | 58% | $237.8M |
35 | Setapp | 13,178 | 20,696 | 7,518 | 57% | $15.0M |
36 | WebCEO | 2,495 | 3,891 | 1,396 | 56% | $25.0M |
37 | Visme | 10,354 | 16,135 | 5,781 | 56% | $1.0M |
38 | UpLead | 1,823 | 2,833 | 1,010 | 55% | $17.5M |
39 | Slickplan | 1,345 | 2,086 | 741 | 55% | $1.0M |
40 | Jotform | 45,485 | 69,553 | 24,068 | 53% | $21.0M |
41 | Wiza | 2,013 | 3,070 | 1,057 | 53% | $5.5M |
42 | Ahrefs | 52,536 | 80,036 | 27,500 | 52% | $100.0M |
43 | Plausible Analytics | 6,084 | 9,251 | 3,167 | 52% | $5.5M |
44 | Creately | 7,816 | 11,844 | 4,028 | 52% | $12.0M |
45 | Homerun | 2,040 | 3,068 | 1,028 | 50% | $38.4M |
46 | Yardi | 1,928 | 2,880 | 952 | 49% | $5500.0M |
47 | Infinite Campus | 1,029 | 1,534 | 505 | 49% | $56.0M |
48 | Filemail | 3,829 | 5,694 | 1,865 | 49% | $1.0M |
49 | LiveAgent | 4,740 | 7,034 | 2,294 | 48% | $5.0M |
50 | Semaphore | 2,727 | 4,025 | 1,298 | 48% | $4.0M |
Want to work out how virtually any company builds its best backlinks? Here’s how I do it in Ahrefs.
I usually start with the Overview report in Site Explorer to get a quick overview of the website’s referring domain growth. Here’s the chart for our #1 company, Elfsight:
Impressive! Next, I use the Anchors report to quickly understand the types of links being built: are they all brand mentions, or links to blog content, or free tools?
In Elfsight’s case, the vast majority of their referring domains (well over 60%) have anchor text containing the word widget:
Looking at some of these links, it’s clear that the company offers free website widgets that also include a link back to Elfsight:
For some websites, anchor text won’t be so revealing. Here’s the Referring Domains report for a SaaS company I excluded from this article. At first glance, they seem to be doing well, with over 100,00 new backlinks acquired in the past year:
But digging into the most common anchor text, it becomes apparent that these are almost all spammy links (advertising Korean business massages).
You can exclude spammy links like these using our Best links filter. By default, the “Best links” filter will only show links that are:
- Dofollow,
- In the page content,
- On a referring domain with a DR of at least 30,
- With estimated organic traffic to the page of at least 500/m.
If you have different criteria for defining a “best” link, you can customize the filter yourself:
With the filter applied, if we run the Anchors report again, we can filter out all of those spam links, and get a clearer picture of the good quality links this website has acquired. Far, far fewer:
Lastly, I like to visit the Best by links report to see the individual pages that have acquired the best links.
Here’s an example from another one of our top 50 websites, Clearscope. Aside from common “utility” pages like their homepage, pricing page, and sign-in page, their most linked-to pages are all thought leadership blog posts—opinions, predictions, and research studies:
Not every company can build links by offering tons of free tools or widgets, but thought leadership content is a link-building strategy that’s much easier for other companies to emulate.
Final thoughts
We’ll share more of these data analyses in the coming weeks. Want us to include your company in the next analysis? Fill out this short Google Form.
-
SEARCHENGINES5 days ago
Daily Search Forum Recap: October 9, 2024
-
SEARCHENGINES7 days ago
Google Showing Competitor Ads Above Local Reviews
-
WORDPRESS6 days ago
The Market Dominance and Technological Advantages That Make WordPress Nearly Irreplaceable as a CMS
-
WORDPRESS7 days ago
Hostinger Review: Website Creation Made Easy
-
SEARCHENGINES3 days ago
Daily Search Forum Recap: October 11, 2024
-
SEO6 days ago
WordPress Announces New Executive Director
-
SEARCHENGINES4 days ago
Daily Search Forum Recap: October 10, 2024
-
SEO6 days ago
The 100 Most Searched People on Google in 2024
You must be logged in to post a comment Login