So Mike King posted a fantastic article last night covering the Google algorithm leak.
Read article here: https://ipullrank.com/google-algo-leak
What are your thoughts on this? Was there anything in here a surprise? Will this change anything for you?
Mike provided several factors in the leak that contradict the Google team's public statements. I know some people really go after Google's public relations team (John Mueller, Gary Illyes, Danny Sullivan) for their statements that don't match what we can see with our own eyes. They are in a difficult position. Google wants to protect their product from manipulation. How can they better interact with SEOs and site owners?
Some of Google's misleading claims highlighted:
✔ Domain Authority: Google claims not to use "domain authority," but the documentation reveals a feature called "siteAuthority."
✔ Clicks for Rankings: Despite Google’s claims, documentation confirms clicks and post-click behavior are used in ranking.
✔ Sandbox: Google denies having a sandbox, but documentation shows a "hostAge" attribute used to sandbox fresh spam.
✔Chrome Data: Google representatives claim Chrome data isn't used in rankings, but documentation includes site-level measures of Chrome views.
The article by Mike King on the Google algorithm leak is indeed a compelling read, especially for those deeply involved in SEO. The revelations he presents challenge some long-held public statements by Google, which, if true, could have significant implications for how SEOs approach optimization and ranking strategies.
Key Takeaways and Surprises
Domain Authority vs. Site Authority:The concept of "domain authority" has always been a topic of debate. Google's consistent stance has been that they do not use a metric called "domain authority" in their ranking algorithms. However, the leak suggesting the existence of a "siteAuthority" feature implies that there might be an analogous internal metric used to assess the overall strength or credibility of a domain. This could change how SEOs view domain-level optimization, possibly placing even more emphasis on the holistic quality of a website rather than just individual pages.
Clicks and Post-Click Behavior in Rankings:This is perhaps the most significant revelation. Google has repeatedly downplayed the role of click data and user behavior post-click in its ranking algorithms, arguing that such metrics are too easily manipulated. However, the leaked documentation suggests that these factors do play a role. This would mean that user engagement metrics are more important than previously acknowledged, which could push SEOs to focus more on improving click-through rates (CTR) and user experience to influence rankings.
Sandboxing via HostAge:The idea of a "sandbox" has been discussed in SEO circles for years, with many speculating that new sites are deliberately held back in rankings until they prove their legitimacy. Google has denied the existence of such a mechanism, but the "hostAge" attribute mentioned in the leak suggests there might be a period during which new or suspicious sites are treated differently. This could confirm suspicions that new sites need time to build trust with Google, which might require a rethink of strategies for launching new domains.
Chrome Data in Rankings:Google's use of Chrome data has always been shrouded in mystery, with representatives often claiming it isn't directly used in rankings. However, if the leak is accurate, site-level measures of Chrome views are considered. This would imply that Google has access to incredibly granular data on user interactions, beyond just search behavior, which could inform rankings in ways that were previously underestimated.
Implications for SEO Practice
These revelations suggest that some previously dismissed tactics or considerations might actually be more important than believed. For instance:
User Engagement: If clicks and post-click behavior are indeed ranking factors, SEOs might need to prioritize improving on-site engagement metrics, such as reducing bounce rates and increasing time on site.
Trust and Authority Building: The concept of "siteAuthority" means that building a domain's reputation through high-quality content, backlinks, and user trust could be even more critical. This might lead to a stronger focus on domain-wide optimization efforts.
Launch Strategies for New Sites: If sandboxing is a reality, then new sites might need more strategic planning to build trust quickly, possibly through aggressive backlink strategies or content seeding.
Google's Position and the SEO Community
The disconnect between Google’s public statements and the leaked documentation places their PR team in a challenging position. On the one hand, they need to protect their search algorithm from being gamed; on the other hand, transparency is key to maintaining trust with the SEO community.
To better interact with SEOs and site owners, Google might consider:
Greater Transparency: While full disclosure of their algorithms isn’t feasible, more transparent explanations of how certain signals are used could help bridge the trust gap.
Acknowledging Nuances: Instead of blanket denials, Google could acknowledge that certain factors, like user behavior or domain authority, might play indirect roles, which could help manage expectations more realistically.
Engaging in More Open Dialogue: Hosting more frequent, open forums where SEOs can ask questions and receive candid answers might foster a better relationship between Google and the SEO community.
The insights from the Google algorithm leak suggest that the gap between what Google says and what they do might be wider than previously thought. For SEOs, this means staying adaptable, continuously testing theories, and focusing on delivering genuine value to users—since, ultimately, user satisfaction seems to be a core driver of Google's algorithms, regardless of how it's measured.
4o