Questioning the Effectiveness of Keywords in URLs

By Deane Barker

There’s an accepted theory in SEO: put keywords in your URLs. This is so accepted, that no one questions it and content management systems routinely have modules, extensions, and allowances for users to create keyword-rich URLs. But, does this work? Does anyone know for sure? I’ve been casually…

The article discusses the effectiveness of placing keywords in URLs for SEO purposes. The author questions the effectiveness of this technique, citing a book by Shari Thurow that suggests keywords in domain names and URLs are not as important as believed. The author suggests that keywords in URLs should be a small part of an overall SEO strategy, not the top spot, and is seeking more solid research on its effectiveness.

Generated by Azure AI on June 24, 2024

There’s an accepted theory in SEO: put keywords in your URLs. This is so accepted, that no one questions it and content management systems routinely have modules, extensions, and allowances for users to create keyword-rich URLs.

But, does this work? Does anyone know for sure? I’ve been casually looking for a while for resources which prove or disprove the effectiveness of this theory, but I haven’t found much. Does this emperor have any clothes?

Years ago, I read Shari Thurow’s book “Search Engine Visibility” and she said this:

Simply placing keywords in a domain name and/or filename is not going to make or break top search engine visibility. […] Keywords in the domains names and filenames are not as important as people are led to believe. […] Keywords in a domain name give minuscule boost when all other factors (text, link, and popularity component) are equal.

I agree with this – I feel like the emphasis on this SEO technique is way, way over-rated. There are so many other factors people should worry about before they start aliasing pages. Put another way, keywords in URLs might be a small part of a over-arching SEO strategy, but they’re not worth much by themselves.

(Now, don’t confuse this with an indictment of clean URLs. I like URL cleanliness, which we’ve talked about quite a bit around here. I think clean, short URLs have a distinct usability benefit. Hence, the URLs on this site.)

I had someone come to me earlier this year in a big hurry to alias all their URLs to help their search engine positioning. I took a look through their site and noticed this:

  1. No unique titles

  2. No meta

  3. Horrific HTML

  4. No keywords in header tags

  5. etc.

I explained to them that they had much bigger SEO problems than keywords in their URLs, but they paid me all the same to allow them to alias all their pages. I have no idea if it helped them or not, but I doubt it.

Getting all uptight about URLs in most cases is like me saying, “I want to win the Mr. Olympia bodybuilding championship…so I need to go get a tan right now.” Sure, having a good tan is a small part of being a competitive bodybuilder, but there are probably quite a few other things I should focus on first. Like my abs.

As such, I feel that keywords in your URLs should be #7 or #8 on a 10-point list of the top SEO techniques, not the #1 or #2 spot that people keep putting it in. Again, I’m looking for any solid research on the effectiveness of this technique. If you know of anything, comments are open.

(Irony: mouseover that Amazon link above and check out the URL…)

This is item #211 in a sequence of 357 items.

You can use your left/right arrow keys to navigate