SEO and article length?

Are there any conditions for article length that will make Google consider your articles better than others or getting higher positions on search engine results?
I'm asking so I will know whether or not to post short or long articles.

I would also be interested in the answer to this thread. Great question.

This gets a bit touchy. Are there conditions.. well yes and no.. Yes there is the Panda Update(s) that looks for "thin" content. When you start reading the Google Guidelines there are many instances that "Thin Content" is mentioned. BUT not once is there mention of word count or length. However, I dont think there is a doubt in most peoples minds that there is such thing as to little content.

There has been more than a few case studies comparing short vs long content. I can not say I have ever seen anything other than long content coming out on top. The ones I pay attention to go into a multitude of topics and look at the to 10 pages in each and compare word counts. That is a pretty reasonable study. One of the issues I see with this type of study tho, is that they tend to look at moderate to high competition keyword terms.. and in the world of long tail keywords ( and lower competition ), the results may not be the same.

I am going to say that I personally try not to drop below 500 words... I am in no way suggesting that this is a hard fast rule.. it simply a personal level that I try to achieve. More often than not, my content is in the 1000+ range and regularly in the 3000 range, so not to often do I hit the 500 word level.

The Atlantic said:

Are there any conditions for article length that will make Google consider your articles better than others or getting higher positions on search engine results?
I'm asking so I will know whether or not to post short or long articles.

Click to expand...

Well, you should have the main keyword you want to get ranked for in the title and stuff. It's also good if you change it up and have keywords that are related to what you're talking about in the article as well. A keyword tool can help with this if you find you are using the same language over and over. In terms of length, I would say just try to answer any questions someone coming to your page might have about the topic at hand. If you want something more specific, I'd say that 400+ words is good for a product review (not long at all). I've written articles that have been way longer (and even shorter) -- depending on the topic.

Joey

savidge4 said:

I am going to say that I personally try not to drop below 500 words... I am in no way suggesting that this is a hard fast rule.. it simply a personal level that I try to achieve. More often than not, my content is in the 1000+ range and regularly in the 3000 range, so not to often do I hit the 500 word level.

Click to expand...

This seems like pretty sound advice. It seems like you have done your homework. Thanks for the response.

Miguelito203 said:

A keyword tool can help with this if you find you are using the same language over and over.

Click to expand...

Do you have a favorite?

Article length is not a ranking factor. The only thing it might impact is the number of different words that one page ranks for. But when you are just talking about one specific keyword you are trying to rank for, it is not a factor.

This is an example I have used many times before. If you search for 'pregnancy' in Google.com, which is fairly competitive and gets searched a lot, pregnancy.com ranks #1 or #2. It swaps back and forth from time to time. There is probably only about 300 words on that entire page, and much of that content is just links and a disclaimer at the bottom of the page.

I'm sure you have heard before that size doesn't matter. Well, when it comes to search engines and rankings, it is not a lie.

The actual ranking algorithms aren't going to care about content length. The Panda algorithm will though. If your content is too thin on too many pages, your entire site can suffer in rankings.

Assuming your pages aren't thin in content then the specific length of the content doesn't matter. (Well not in an absolute sense)

Here is what I mean by that.

If you are writing an article that explains how to build a kite from scratch, you could write an article that says take two balsa wood sticks and tie them together like a cross. Then cut up a garbage bag and tape it to one side of the balsa wood sticks so that it forms a neat diamond shape. That article might take a few hundred words to write and it would answer the question of How to build a kite from scratch.

Or you could write an article that explains what type of balsa wood sticks to get, what dimensions to get and where you can buy them. Then you could explain what different types of plastic/other materials you could use to make the wind catching portion of the kite. You could explain where to source those materials. You could explain how to make a tail for the kite and what kind of string you should use for the kite. You could explain how to make different shaped kites. You could explain how to build a kite from common home materials for under two dollars. You could explain lots of neat things that would be interesting to someone who really wants to know how to build a kite. That article is going to be very long. It might take several thousand words to write that article. You would probably want to include some photos or images that help explain things too.

Which article is going to rank better?

The longer one.

Why?

1) Because it will probably have a higher word count of relevant keywords (which is a ranking factor even though it is a relatively minor one) (assuming all the other on-page SEO criteria were the same for both articles)
2) Because when a person discovers that article in the search results, they aren't going to bounce back to the search results to keep searching for a better answer. You are giving them everything they want to know. When Google sees that nobody bounces back to the SERPS after clicking through to your article, Google is going to assume you have good useful content for that search query.

Those are the two primary reasons that article is going to rank higher. The longer article is probably going to have other superior on-page SEO scores too though, because you will likely be including other things like more images and more subheadings with relevant topics. Those are common byproducts of superior content.

Could the crappy article outrank the longer one?
Yes. The crappy article could outrank the longer one if the crappy article had enough inbound link juice and inbound links with keyword rich anchor text.

Chances are, the crappy article would end up getting demoted though. It would likely get demoted because a lot of people would bounce back to the SERPs and click on the next lower article. Once that happens enough times, Google will begin demoting that crappy article. Then, the person with the crappy article would have to send additional signals to Google to get that article to go back up. Those additional signals might include improving the quality of the content and thoroughness of the article (which would make that article longer). And those additional signals could include additional inbound links (that are hopefully juicy and/or contain relevant keyword anchor text).

Conclusion:
If your article is very thorough (and very useful in the eyes of the readers) then it doesn't really matter all that much how long it is. The goal is for the article to be exceptionally useful in the eyes of the reader. So much so, that they don't want to keep looking in the search results for the answer to that question. So on average, yes, longer articles do tend to rank higher.

Google loves quality and informative articles. It doesn't matter how much is the length and title of the article. The important part is that what you are deliver to your end users.

One thing to keep in mind is that Google is trying to give the searcher what he/she is looking for based on the keyword searched. Many keywords (especially short keywords or one word keywords) are never going to return something like an article in the first place no matter how good of SEO you think you are doing on the page.

Consider the search already mentioned - pregnancy

When someone searches on Google for the word pregnancy - they probably aren't looking for an article about pregnancy. They are looking for general information about pregnancy. And Google knows this. How do they know this? Because that is what people have been clicking on for years when they search for the word pregnancy. Google learns over time what "most people" are looking for when they type a certain keyword.

However, if you do a search for "how to get pregnant" you will see that most of the results are articles. That makes sense because an article about "how to get pregnant" is likely the type of information that a person is interested in finding when they do a search for "how to get pregnant".

If you are going to try to analyze how Google's rankings work, it makes sense to compare the right type of page for the query you are researching.

If you wanted to rank well for the keyword "pregnancy" you certainly would not just write an article about pregnancy. You would never get that article to rank high for any reasonable length of time because the people who landed on that page would probably bounce back to the search results and keep searching. Maybe you could do it, but it would be really, really, really challenging to write about the right aspects of pregnancy that people would actually not bounce back to the SERPs to keep looking for more information. And because you couldn't stop people from doing that, you probably wouldn't be able to keep your article ranking very high. Your page would need to be more than just an article. It would ideally be an information hub about pregnancy and connect the user with many different answers about many different questions related to pregnancy. This is because Google knows that someone who is searching for that term is actually looking for answers to questions like "how long is a woman pregnant" and "what is it like to be pregnant" and "what to expect if you get pregnant" and "pregnancy information" and many other related questions like that. It's really a crappy keyword because the intent behind people searching it is so varied. Just using an article to rank for this term would be silly and probably a waste of time.

Look how its different though if you consider a different keyword. If you wanted to rank for "how to get pregnant", then you could produce an article page that is superior in content and on-page SEO compared to any of the existing pages ranking for that phrase right now. If you produced content that was good enough to satisfy the searcher, you did your on-page SEO well, and you sent enough link juice + anchor text rich links to the page, then you could rank number one for that search.

Let's suppose you wanted your "how to get pregnant" page to rank high for the term pregnancy. You could send it link juice till your blue in the face. You might get it to pop up high in the search results for a while if you sent it enough high power links, but it would not last there long. It would get demoted by the part of the Google algorithm that determines if the end users like what they are finding once they click through to that page. And a lot of the people who searched "pregnancy" and landed on your "how to get pregnant" page, would bounce back to the search results and keep searching lower ranked pages in those search results because they are looking for something else other than how to get pregnant. That would demote your page.

If you want to rank for the long term, you have to first deliver a page that is what someone likes to find when they search for the keywords you are targeting. The page content has to match the query.

Google has learned when to return ecommerce sites for a query. Google has learned when to return information pages for a query. Google has learned when it should return an information (hub) compared to an information (authority) for an informational search. Google has learned when to return a local website for a query. Their learning keeps getting better and better. If you want to rank for a certain keyword, first figure out what type of site/page Google would want to return for that search result. If it is an informational search that requires in depth explanations of a very specific topic, then an article (a lengthy in-depth article) is probably ideal. If it is anything else, then an article might not be a good choice of page content.

PTTed said:

1) Because it will probably have a higher word count of relevant keywords (which is a ranking factor even though it is a relatively minor one) (assuming all the other on-page SEO criteria were the same for both articles)

Click to expand...

Agree but for example, I have 2 articles on 2 different sites with the word count (including images/ on-page structure/ videos/..) is the same ( 2000 words ) then how to determine which one will get better position on Google?

Asking this because I read this

PTTed said:

Those are the two primary reasons that article is going to rank higher. The longer article is probably going to have other superior on-page SEO scores too though, because you will likely be including other things like more images and more subheadings with relevant topics. Those are common byproducts of superior content.

Click to expand...

PTTed said:

2) Because when a person discovers that article in the search results, they aren't going to bounce back to the search results to keep searching for a better answer. You are giving them everything they want to know. When Google sees that nobody bounces back to the SERPS after clicking through to your article, Google is going to assume you have good useful content for that search query.

Click to expand...

Never heard of Google could record this process. Like I heard bounce rate in SEO.

Sandra said:

Let me see if I get it right. What you are saying is: whatever is already there for the keyword sets the rule, and the article we try to position will have better chances if we follow it--in terms of length at least (?)

Click to expand...

It doesn't so much set the rule, as it will give you an idea of what the rules at play are. When we start talking about length... INSTANTLY other variables come into play. ( I know SEOPub wont like to read this next part - sorry! ) but keyword density, Keyword proximity, LSI variables and factors, On page linking and structure and on and on.

If you look at the page in my case that appears number one whattoexpect.com/pregnancy/landing-page.aspx there is little to no question here this is a page with the soul intent of ranking for this term. I didn't run the exact numbers but the keyword density is basically retarded, this is like the old days when keyword stuffing was the way to go.. if there is the possibility of inserting the word "pregnancy" in there..they got got it in there. by line 32 in the the code the keyword is present a mind boggling 17 times, and 11 of those lines are blank. There are tons of internal links with the keyword in the URL - i lost count

basically if you start looking at the pages that are already ranked.. see what they are doing, and HOW they are doing it, you can copy their efforts. There are 2 or 3 paths to the top of Everest... you can go it alone and not follow a path to success ( the top of the hill ) and see what happens.. or you CAN follow a given route, and increase your odds... Looking at the example page.. you would need a good amount of depth in terms of content and structure... and I would flat out say you couldn't get there using wordpress.

PTTed said:

Consider the search already mentioned - pregnancy

When someone searches on Google for the word pregnancy - they probably aren't looking for an article about pregnancy. They are looking for general information about pregnancy. And Google knows this. How do they know this? Because that is what people have been clicking on for years when they search for the word pregnancy. Google learns over time what "most people" are looking for when they type a certain keyword.

However, if you do a search for "how to get pregnant" you will see that most of the results are articles. That makes sense because an article about "how to get pregnant" is likely the type of information that a person is interested in finding when they do a search for "how to get pregnant".

If you are going to try to analyze how Google's rankings work, it makes sense to compare the right type of page for the query you are researching.

If you wanted to rank well for the keyword "pregnancy" you certainly would not just write an article about pregnancy. You would never get that article to rank high for any reasonable length of time because the people who landed on that page would probably bounce back to the search results and keep searching. Maybe you could do it, but it would be really, really, really challenging to write about the right aspects of pregnancy that people would actually not bounce back to the SERPs to keep looking for more information. And because you couldn't stop people from doing that, you probably wouldn't be able to keep your article ranking very high. Your page would need to be more than just an article. It would ideally be an information hub about pregnancy and connect the user with many different answers about many different questions related to pregnancy. This is because Google knows that someone who is searching for that term is actually looking for answers to questions like "how long is a woman pregnant" and "what is it like to be pregnant" and "what to expect if you get pregnant" and "pregnancy information" and many other related questions like that. It's really a crappy keyword because the intent behind people searching it is so varied. Just using an article to rank for this term would be silly and probably a waste of time.

Click to expand...

I think this is where things get really interesting... I wouldn't call this term "Crappy" as much as I would call it what I label as a "gateway" term. Another example of a gateway term would be "Widget" are they looking for a wood widget? a metal widget? a red widget? a blue widget?

So going back to the term being used here.. "Pregnancy" Like you have said Google knows you are not specifically looking for the term "pregnancy".. they know this because of the years of people going to this term.. bouncing a few pages, and then refining their search to say "Pregnancy test", or "pregnancy diet" And this is where Hummingbird really kicks in.. it "intuitively" knows the term you looked at is not ultimately the term you are looking for. The algorithm is then going to present pages that meet the keyword criteria for the present search, but ALSO the context and content they know you are really looking for.

I have a philosophy for the online buyers curve in relation to keywords. there are 4 separate groupings of terms. there are "looking" terms, Compare / Review terms, Buyers terms, and Support terms. Gateway terms fall into the looking terms category, people looking for information.. and in commerce this would be seen as initial research to making a purchase choice. I am looking for a "Saw" well what kind of saw? a band saw.. ok ok I want a 12" full base stand alone band saw. Now there are all these brands to look at..I want to read about this one and this one and that one.. ok I have decided I want the rigid 12 inch full base stand up band saw model # XX2356 - once they get it home.. 3 hours later and some blood and sweat they hop online "How to install saw blade for rigid 12 inch full base stand up band saw model # XX2356" They gather information.. they refine the information and start narrowing down on a choice. they make the choice.. they buy the choice, they then need support for the choice.

Non commerce terms follow the same pattern. start broad, and end up micro defined in the information they are looking for. If I can layout the pattern, I am more than sure Google can. I think in recent years Google is placing more emphasis not only on the term at hand, but the pattern of terms to follow. The pregnancy pages do exactly that. I am a firm believer of not only developing pages with Content, but with context of a search, and then linking to relevant contextual content from that page. diminish the "bounce" and increase your authority.. not only with the readre but with google as well.

rainmaker11 said:

Agree but for example, I have 2 articles on 2 different sites with the word count (including images/ on-page structure/ videos/..) is the same ( 2000 words ) then how to determine which one will get better position on Google?

Click to expand...

If you publish two identical articles (identical in every single way) on two different sites, then the article that will rank the highest in Google will be the article that has the best inbound link profile. In other words, it will be the article that has the most combined PageRank flowing into it and/or keyword rich anchor text links.

If there are no links pointing at either of those pages (meaning they are complete orphan pages that Google would never discover on its own because there are no links and there is no sitemap) and you just submitted the URL to Google for discovery, then the article that ranks the highest would be the article published on the domain that has the most authority.

rainmaker11 said:

Never heard of Google could record this process. Like I heard bounce rate in SEO.

Click to expand...

When you are on Google's website and you do a search, it knows what you searched for, right? And it also knows whether you clicked on the first listing or second or third or whatever. It knows if you clicked to see search results 11-20. It knows all of that.

If you click one of the listings (suppose you click on the URL listed number one in the search results) then your browser goes to that other URL. If you click the back button in your browser and return to the Google page, you will notice that the URL you visited is now a different shade of color. That is because you just visited that page. Google knows you just visited that page. And they know how much time you spent on that page you visited before you returned to the search results and clicked on something else again.

Now suppose you performed an informational search like the example "how to get pregnant" and you are only on that number one listing page for 3 seconds. Then you return back to the same search results page and click the next lower listing. And then you never return to that search results page again. What does that suggest to Google?

That suggests that the information on the second listing might be more useful than the information on the first listing. So you know what Google does? They move the ranking of the second listing up to number one and demote the ranking of the original page down one or more spots. Then they test it again. If this new page they ranked number one doesn't get people returning to the search results to keep searching, then it probably has superior content on it. Therefore it probably deserves the higher ranking.

My guess is that somewhere in the Google algorithm there is likely a data variable labeled = user experience or usefulness or something along those lines. That variable would be tagged to a specific keyword.

And a page that solves a search query for the end user gets a higher score on the usefulness rating for that keyword so that it can more easily outrank other pages that have a lower usefulness rating. But the usefulness rating will be just one factor in the algorithm. There are many other factors that come into play in determining rankings. In order to get Google to even consider ranking the page high, you need to get the other factors right first (very high relevancy score + high authority score).

The Atlantic said:

Are there any conditions for article length that will make Google consider your articles better than others or getting higher positions on search engine results?
I'm asking so I will know whether or not to post short or long articles.

Click to expand...

I think that if you stay above the 300 words count you are safe. Above that count an article can be as long as you want.
Just remember: Don`t write an article for it`s length, write it to help other users on the Internet, this is what Google is looking for. A Google representative said that you should not ask yourself how many visitors you had, but how many visitors you have helped.
Ask yourself what would you want to find out about the subject discussed, and write about it. An article should be as long as it needs to be (but not shorter than 300 words).

There are no length required in any article, given all kind of information of that particular article. If your article is unique and quality then easily exit in Google or minimum atleast 250 words on that article.

It is well known that article length is one of the ranking signals so how can you say that 250 words are enough for an article?
Heck....if I put my mind to it I can write a response here longer than 250 words.
As far as articles go, size does matter

HCFGrizzly said:

I suggest you look at the link below and scroll to #16 and also click on the link and read the other article.
Youtube videos are another discussion. It is common knowledge that Youtube videos are getting preferential treatment in the SERPs.

http://backlinko.com/google-ranking-factors

Can you show me an article where it says that content length IS NOT a ranking signal? (see what I did here? We don`t know for sure what exactly the ranking signals are, we can just speculate because Google is not going to tell us)

Where did I say that if pages have thin content they won`t be ranked? How many pages with thin content have you seen #1 in SERPs?

What exactly is the purpose of a website if not to offer information about a given topic?

And my last question. Can you tell me how Google`s Panda views thin content?

Click to expand...

Oh Christ.

First of all, Brian Dean's "ranking factors" are mostly speculation and horse dung. The chart he references is a correlation study, not an actual experiment designed to get proof. It's the same kind of thing snakeoil salesmen are using today to get people to believe that social signals are a ranking factor.

Brian used to put out some really useful content. Now he is just putting out content that he knows followers want to hear. Same thing Neil does. Actually, for a long time, Brian was pretty much the voice behind Neil, but that is another story.

Can you show me an article where it says that content length IS NOT a ranking signal?

Click to expand...

I don't need to. You are the one that said

It is well known that article length is one of the ranking signals

Click to expand...

The burden of proving your statement is on you.

Now, if you meant to say it is a "well known myth", then you would be correct.

I have seen tons of SERPs with pages that have "thin" content ranking #1. Some of them are my own.

What exactly is the purpose of a website if not to offer information about a given topic?

Click to expand...

Sure. And why does that information have to be XXXX number of words? If a query can be answered in 100 words, why is that bad?

A common example I have used over and over is pregnancy.com. It bounces back and forth between #1 and #2 all the time, but has been there for years for the term "pregnancy". The term is searched about 160,000 times per month and is pretty competitive.

That site fits into every definition people put out there about "thin" content. For the most part, it is just a feeder site for babycenter.com. The disclaimer in the footer has about as much content as the rest of the page. Yet Google loves this site.

On top of all the proof that is out there in the SERPs, just think about it logically for a minute. If I write an article in which I ramble on just to reach 1,000 words versus if I wrote a concise article on the same topic that hit all the key points in 500 words, then in your mind Google would give the 1,000-word article a boost over the 500-word article? What if I wrote another article and made it 1,001 words? That would be even better, right?

Now, if you want to argue that having more content might give you a better chance to rank for a ton of other related keywords based on how you USE that content, that is a different story and an argument can certainly be made for that.

Google's algorithm is a lot smarter and more advanced that that. It is not just counting words and giving a thumbs up for having more words on your page.

HCFGrizzly said:

This is your opinion and I respect it. But you won`t change my mind: You can`t cover in depth a subject with an article of just 250 words.
I never said that the length of an article is the number one ranking signal and that`s why I find your argument (1000 words vs 1001 words) childish.
Of course that a well done and concise article of 500 words will be better than a 1000 article where you ramble on and on about stupid stuff.
Where did I say that Google`s algorithm is just counting words and giving thumbs up? You seem to go a long way from "one of the ranking signals" to Google is counting words.
Say what you want, but in my opinion if you have an article of 250 words and I have one article of 500 words and both have the same writing quality, my article will rank better than yours, and it will also rank for more keywords.
One more thing: Until Google will tell us which are the ranking signals (be sure it will never happen) we only have speculation, nothing more. You can say something, I can say another thing and we will be rambling here until 2020. So, please, don`t act like you have seen the list of ranking signals.
I`m glad for you that you are ranking #1 in your niche with thin content....I`ll just keep ranking my websites as I always did: focusing on content.

Click to expand...

So Google is counting words or it is not counting words? You seem to contradict yourself there.


And as for...

You can`t cover in depth a subject with an article of just 250 words.

Click to expand...

That entirely depends on what the subject is.

If I write a 10-part guide on how to build a shed, and I decide to put the whole thing structured in a silo with each part on its own page, one part could be about picking where to put your shed. I probably could cover that in 250 words or less.

Anyhow, there are tons of examples in the SERPs (where all the real answers are) that show article length is not a ranking signal.

Like I said, if it was a ranking signal, then I could just write a few more words than all my competitors and, everything else being equal, I would outrank them. For how complicated Google's algorithm is, and all the tweaking they have done over the years, that sounds really silly.

That's the equivalent of saying the number of backlinks is a ranking signal versus the quality of backlinks.

Would it not be reasonable to look at the top ranking organic sites (for your search topic) and review their content for keywords and content length to know what Google prefers. Or will backlinks be a far greater influence in ranking over content?

SEOPub said:

Article length is not a ranking factor. The only thing it might impact is the number of different words that one page ranks for. But when you are just talking about one specific keyword you are trying to rank for, it is not a factor.

This is an example I have used many times before. If you search for 'pregnancy' in Google.com, which is fairly competitive and gets searched a lot, pregnancy.com ranks #1 or #2. It swaps back and forth from time to time. There is probably only about 300 words on that entire page, and much of that content is just links and a disclaimer at the bottom of the page.

I'm sure you have heard before that size doesn't matter. Well, when it comes to search engines and rankings, it is not a lie.

Click to expand...

I don't think that the ranking is depend on the article length. As I am regular reader on seroundtable, Rusty Brick post article with 300 to 500 words maximum in length. Then also his site is ranking on search engine

Yes length is counted but if the article contains good and deep information on the topic which people are looking for. An article with 1000 words with no actual & deep information will be a waste of time.