Google Still Ranks by the Webpage SEO, Not the Site as a Whole

I’m going to disclose to you a SEO certainty that will respond to such countless inquiries regarding how Google ranks site pages that I can’t cover them all in this article.

It’s likewise an incredible method to work up discussion in your better SEO conversation gatherings.

Google positions site pages, not sites.

Try not to trust me? Request John Mueller from Google (I did):

Try not to trust John Mueller or Google?

Indeed, that is an entire distinctive conversation, however fortunately, there have been many, many, numerous other people who have expressed something very similar.

Google positions pages, not sites.

When you think about the force of this apparently unassuming assertion, you’ll perceive how remembering it while you’re building up your natural pursuit procedure can disentangle a significant number of your choices.

Furthermore, it stops large numbers of the more famous SEO discusses we’ve all endured throughout the long term.

How Google ranks site pages? What Does It Really Mean?

See, we don’t have to overcomplicate this here, yet how about we jump into how this expression shakes things up and now and then truly disturbs a portion of my kindred SEO experts.

Fundamentally, “how Google ranks site pages, not sites,” implies that Google treats each website page that its robots slither and list like its own little independent universe of substance, code, and connections.

While different website pages impact that world, where this world dwells in the more noteworthy universe doesn’t make a difference to Google.

Accordingly, to the furthest extent that positioning and ordering go, that site page could live on any space it enjoys, and Google would treat it a similar way.

I would attempt to make a Superman/Bottle City of Kandor reference here, yet it would presumably assume control over the entire conversation.

Proceeding onward.

For what reason do some SEO masters disdain this apparently guiltless expression?

Since its reality breaks numerous ideas they hold dear – and in light of the fact that their business relies upon individuals accepting that these ideas of theirs exist.

We should not zero in a lot on that side of things.

All things being equal, we’ll take a gander at how this thought clarifies such a great amount about how we realize positioning on Google functions.

I’ve never had a lot of utilization for the expressions “on-page” or “off-page” SEO, or “specialized SEO” so far as that is concerned, so how about we separate this into three regions I use for my SEO reviews (and considerably more): Content, Webpage Design, and Authority (Links).


While I was composing this article, I got an Ask to Answer from Quora that lines up with the “how Google ranks pages, not sites,” idea with regards to the Content territory of SEO: “Can writing for a blog about various subjects in a similar blog hurt my positioning?”

It’s a decent inquiry. I’ve even seen outstanding amongst other SEO experts on the planet ask something like his Facebook companions.

At the point when I raised “site pages, not sites” in my answer, it basically finished the conversation.

Consistently, you most likely read the absolute best instances of why contributing to a blog (or some other composition for distribution on the web) about various subjects doesn’t harm your Google positioning: news sites.

Many themes, living in concordance on a similar area, without doing a touch of harm to one another.


How Google ranks pages, not sites.

All things considered, we wouldn’t have any desire to experience a daily reality such that Google positioned pages dependent on a solitary subject of the whole site.

As Joshua Hardwick of Ahrefs once clarified,

“Because your business makes stained glass windows doesn’t imply that each page on your site should rank for the question, ‘stained glass windows.'”

Page Design

In the event that you’ve been in the site improvement game for any timeframe, you’ve most likely heard the entire “subdomain versus subfolder” banter at any rate once. I swear it air pockets to the highest point of the pot of SEO conversation thoughts regarding once every couple of years.

Consistently, Google explains. It doesn’t make a difference.

For what reason doesn’t it make a difference?

Since Google ranks site pages and not sites; in this manner, those website pages can live on either a subdomain or a subfolder, and Google would treat them a similar way.

By and by, we would prefer not to experience a daily reality such that the errors of one page on your site hauls down the whole site.

For example, you’ve in all likelihood experienced situations where one of your website pages is more slow than the remainder of your pages.

This single page doesn’t haul down your whole site, simply that one page.


One of the more famous and successful SEO systems around these days is Content Hubs. The cycle, otherwise called the Pillar-Cluster Model, depends on making a “center point” or “column” subject that connects to other subpages or “groups” of subtopics that give more noteworthy detail on the center/column content.

One reason why this technique functions admirably is on the grounds that it considers a simple strategy to pass the position procured from inbound connects to your primary subject centers to the subtopics (or the other way around).

For what reason does it function admirably?

Try not to cause me to compose it once more. Google will believe I’m watchword stuffing.

While those interior connections may not be as amazing as the outer connections, they actually have a ton of force since Google considers them to be as individual pages with their own position.

Sporadically, I’ll see somebody guarantee that this substance procedure additionally makes a by and large “effective power” for your whole site yet given the entire “page, not site” rule affirmed by Google, we realize this isn’t accurate.

This carries us to the idea of a general expert for your whole site, or area maybe.

While some SEO instrument organizations have become famous pushing this idea, Google will be the first to reveal to you that it basically doesn’t exist.

Presently, you may ask: if this site wide position metric doesn’t exist, for what reason do nasty third party referencing procedures like “Parasite Hosting” function admirably?

Since it doesn’t work.

Parasite facilitating is the point at which a connection manufacturer sells a connection from content covered on a notable, typically instructive site.

Nonetheless, the lone measure that this “hack” is successful is an area level power metric impacted by different spaces with a high area level measurement, not genuine positioning changes.

“Pages, not sites” uncovers a whole sub-economy of the SEO exchange dependent on a completely false idea.

Try not to squander your cash attempting to change a metric that just has an incentive to individuals attempting to offer that measurement to other people.


A few individuals from the SEO people group love to highlight Occam’s razor regarding why their unverified hypothesis dependent on lacking information and messy measurements demonstrates the presence of a positioning sign dependent on the aggregate conduct of the whole site – “the least difficult clarification is typically the correct one!”

Incidentally, a significantly more straightforward answer clarifies why their hypothesis doesn’t hold up to examination.

I’m not the first to state that how Google ranks site pages, not sites, and I question I’ll be the last.

Ideally, since you know better, you’ll go along with me in this mantra that responds to so numerous SEO questions.