I'm pleased to announce the full results of this year's Local Search Ranking Factors survey were published earlier this morning. (The pie chart below is just a teaser.)
Those of you who attended MozCon a couple weeks ago got a sneak preview of these results, but I'm guessing that few of you had a chance to fully digest them in the 14.2 seconds I spent on the slides in which I presented them. Let's dive in!
If this is the first time you've heard of the Local Search Ranking Factors, most of the background can be found on the results page itself. I'll highlight a couple of changes for this year:
- As I was putting the survey together this year, I thought to myself, "You know, there's really no single 'local algorithm' at Google anymore" — if, indeed, there ever was one. This year is our group's first effort to help readers distinguish between the thematic signals that have more or less prevalence depending on the result type Google is showing (localized organic, pack/carousel, or maps).
- Given that a large chunk of the audience for this survey over the years has been agency owners and agency representatives — at least judging by the emails I've received — I decided to try to cater to this audience a bit more this year. Guessing that most of you have already read previous surveys and understand the basics, I also asked the 35 experts to score the same factors according to what they felt made the most difference in competitive markets. So for those of you who already have the basics covered, pay attention to that second column of results.
- I added personalization as a thematic signal to ask about this year. Frankly, I was surprised it wasn't considered a larger factor on mobile results. Of all the factors on the list, I think this one will be the most interesting to revisit in 2014, as searchers and experts alike become more and more familiar with the new Google Maps.
By and large, the primary factors seem to have stayed largely the same for the past couple of years:
- Proper category associations
- A physical address in the city being searched
- Consistent, high-quality citations from sources that are:
- Authoritative
- Trustworthy
- Industry-relevant
- Your NAP information featured clearly on your website
- Your location as a keyword in title tags and headlines
- A smattering of reviews on both Google and third-party sites
- A handful of high-quality inbound links
Though I wanted to give the other 34 experts "the floor" on the survey page itself, I do want to comment about a couple of responses I found particularly interesting:
- Despite Google's massively-hyped integration of its Google Plus and Google Places platforms just over a year ago (a process that is far from complete, by the way), social signals still seem to play a relatively small role in rankings — just 6.3% overall. But the consensus seems to be that the place to begin would be rel=author tag implementation. This was suggested as the #22 priority in competitive markets, versus #34 as a foundational priority, and several experts mentioned it in their comments.
- Perhaps the most surprising factor was that reviews from authority reviewers were rated the #3 competitive difference-maker. If you're in a competitive market, I'd encourage you to pay special attention to Google's City Experts program, and think about checking out this Twitter/Followerwonk strategy I detailed in January.
- As we move into a world where maps are becoming the local search paradigm, it's remarkable to me just how little effect (less than 25%) the primary factors in traditional SEO — on-page optimization and inbound links — are judged to have on rankings.
- Meanwhile, Google continues to emphasize these factors in its localized organic results (judged by the experts to be right around 50%), which should give businesses without a physical location some measure of consolation.
- As far as negative factors go, call-tracking numbers and business name keyword-stuffing continue to be some of the most egregious offenses you can make in local search.
A couple of quick closing remarks:
Huge thanks to Derric Wise from UX/Design and Devin Ellis on our Inbound Engineering team for putting this beautiful-looking page together.
And, if you want to know more about this year's survey, I would encourage you to sign up for Local University Advanced at SMX East coming up in just a few weeks. I'll be speaking much more about tactics you can use to win on these factors in New York!
OK, that's enough out of me for this year's survey, anyway. As I do every year, I'm eagerly anticipating the discussion of the results in the comments!
Is it just me or most of the ranking factors have remained largely the same as last time this was updated?
Yep, no major changes.
Great work, David (and team)!
I was particularly surprised to see that according to the responses the ranking factors on desktop and mobile are relatively same. My observations can obviously not be that accurate as I don't geographically live where the "action" is, but I feel like there is some significant field for discussion in this area of the research.
Thanks again for inviting me to participate!
@Nyagoslav, I agree. I haven't seen much difference in desktop vs mobile as I thought I would at this point. A year ago I though we'd be seeing a greater separation in the two. Maybe next year? I'm glad (and a little relieved) that the rest of the panel is experiencing the same results. Validation among other professionals is great to know that you are on the right path.
@David, Happy to lend my experiences again this year. Next year I'm expecting greater changes in the mobile (again) and social factors. :)
Thanks David, really cool. This will come in handy as I am doing some research for Mexico and Latin America. Digging deep into it since there are not so many sources of information where Google can fetch information from. I think that even more, businesses will need to optimize their local pages and websites to be as friendly as possible so that Google gets that juicy citation information.
If you have any sort of insights as to international local rankings, I would love to read your thoughts on it.
International rankings for local search are largely the same as in the US. Obviously some newer versions of Panda or Penguin haven't been released internationally, and some ranking factors start affecting the search results slower outside Google.com, but other than that everything is similar. I actually had a fun interview on this topic just a few weeks ago. It was posted here and I was "interviewed" by another of the contributors to the Local Search Ranking Factors - Phil Rozek.
@Nyagoslav, thanks for sharing that resource. It's a great one.
@Eiderv, I'll be coming out with a post later this month on some international citation sources that I hope will help with your efforts!
That's really true way to make a good analysis about - Local search ranking factors.
Reviews = Google reviews
Citations like - Yelp and others
Social Share = Gplus, Facebook, Pinterest and other social power links
Local ads = Craigslist and other top class local ads websites.
These are the key factors of success in Local Map optimization.
Well Good research David !
Regards
Denish Verma
DnAWebSolution
Thanks for allowing me to participate again. As always I value the comments and insights as different participants are viewing and studying different aspects, sites, and verticals from their own perspectives.
I really prefer local apps to browser search on mobiles. I truly wonder how much local search is via apps. Certainly in the restaurant industry both yelp and Opentable are commenting that their mobile traffic is growing and I assume lots and lots of it is via apps.
On the other hand we see indications within our own smb's that mobile visitors tend to click on the pac results at a higher rate than via desktop. Not a scientific study but through observations via various quirks.
On another topic I'm stunned by the commentary about the carousel. It seems to me it hits two industries hard: hotels and restaurants. In their own right they are different...hotel searches might be dominated by out of town searchers and restaurants might be dominated by local searchers. Both industries, and especially hotels have to put more value on reservation visits than mere search visits. Reservations bring in income. Searches may bring in income or they may not. Virtually all hotels are connected to reservation sites yet only a small percentage of all the restaurant sites are tied to reservations...(though they tend to be the big ticket restaurants).
It seems to early to me to make strong observations on the effects of the carousel. Its only been around for a short time. We need studies; studies of massive amounts of traffic to see the effect. My early guesses are that the carousel with up to 20 different choices will disburse traffic to many sites. Does anyone have data at this point? The other thing about the carousel and restaurants is that ...there is an industry that gets a tremendous volume of traffic via mobile...and the carousel isn't showing on mobile.
All in all, its always good to get the opinions of a lot of observers and testers on many facets of local search to see the aggregate analyses and comments.
Dave, thanks for your voluble AND valuable comments, and for your participation, as always.
:D always happy to go voluble ;) Good work, David!!
Nice one. Quick quid pro quo for ya - similar colors in a pie chart are like wearing an outfit comprised of different shades of plaid. Good from far, far from good.
Hi David
Great !!
However, as feedback - for the pie chart signals, had a contrast color option would have been used, it could have been much better to interpret !!
The close set of color theme (of almost similar orange & yellow family) is taking time to comprehend the pie chart. A Percentage figure in the pie would have further added value to it.
Hover over pie chart pieces and you'll see percentages. (Not the static image above, but the actual live LSRF page.)
Modi, thanks for that feedback. I'll talk to our design team & see if we can't figure out a more easily readable color-scheme for the pie charts.
Thanks David, have been anxiously awaiting and just shared this at the Local Search Forum. Appreciate the opportunity to be a contributor again this year.
HUGE thanks for coordinating everyone’s efforts and compiling all this data for the benefit of small businesses and the local marketing industry!
What I found works well for local search is a blend of locations (in content), links pointing in with location, registering for google places/yahoo locals, having an address on the website...basically stuff to let google know what areas you are serving.
Great work David et al!
I've been following the LSRF updates since they were first published over at davidmihm.com (at least I think so anyway!*) and have found them to be really valuable. I'm glad that Moz is continuing to carry the torch.
* David - When was the first volume published? I've been doing SEO since 2009 and I'm sure it's maybe 2010...?
Steviephil, thanks for your comment. This is actually the sixth survey I've published, so the first was in 2008. The previous versions are all linked from the results page itself.
Thanks David! :-)
Thanks David and contributors, great work! I look forward to this list as a great way to challenge my own assumptions and priorities.
Is the "freshness" of a review (or update) considered part of velocity? I noticed Phil Rozek referenced reviews as a "sign of life" but otherwise I didn't get a feel of how recent a change or review was impacted rank. A more recent review (by a reviewer with some credibility) would at least indicate the location was still open at the time of the review. Or if the owner modified the places page or location site in some way (rather than abandoning it if it had moved or closed).
I agree with Phil that a steady handful of reviews is a good "sign of life" & do think there's some merit to the idea of a continuously-sliding timeline for reviews that Google considers most relevant.
Great. That's a funny trick of Google. An excellent shot by Google! It will probably drive more reviews and make Google Local even better. It is a bit surprising me because Google doesn’t like businesses to solicit reviews from users, but they are soliciting reviewers now.
Getting reviews from clients is not always that easy. Not everyone wants to participate when asked. Google may want us to ask, clients seem to agree and are happy with the services, but don't always follow through with the reviews. As more people come on board with reviewing it should/will have more value depending on what service we are talking about. Clients are more apt to rate a restaurant rather than something like their Realtors.
Well being the social guy I am, I like to see that social media is starting to play a bigger part. It is growing and people need to be involved in it.
Thanks for the read.
Thank you for sharing this with us, it really still amazes me how many businesses are still not taking the google places listing and developing it further, only the other day i managed to get a business on the first page of google with a d listing on google places for team building, this business was not even in the top 100 search before.
Thanks, this is helpful!
Very nice moz team! David or team - can you explain the 'velocity' of reviews/+1s/etc a bit more?
Velocity of social mentions (or links, or citations, etc) refers to how frequently new activity of the same kind occurs. An example of irregular velocity would be a website that got 500 links within a week, and in the next 6 months got addition 5 links.
He's referring to the rate at which you acquire new reviews or +1's.
If you tell all your friends to +1 your Google page (or write a review), then your velocity will shoot up and then shoot right back down the next month (something Google probably considers suspicious behavior).
A more natural velocity would be to get 10 new +1's in a month to your Google+ page, every month. This rate is more natural than 100 +1's in just one week, and therefore more likely to be legitimate.
great, thanks guys!
This is such a killer resource, as always. Thanks for taking the time to put it together, and thanks to the Moz team for the stunning visualizations.
Are you considering doing a follow up after the local carousel has a little more time to develop into it's own entity, or is that going to be reserved for the next Local Search Ranking factor release?
Hey Dan,
From what I can tell, the carousels are using the exact same ranking algorithm as the local packs do, so there aren't any unique considerations for it aside from optimizing how your listing *looks* through the photo and review scores. Think of it as standard local optimization, with a bit of extra consideration around click-through rate optimization.
It's nice to have this all documented finally (thanks David). Google has a LONG WAY to go with local search. Probably another year before we see a more sophisticated algorithm.
Reviews have very little weight in your local ranking... which is kind of stupid if you ask me. If Google's goal is to serve its visitors with the most relevant and useful results, then why not factor in what the customers are saying about the business?
I think your area code, as well as your address, are the primary ranking factors.
Definitely bookmarking the study to read later. Thanks, David!
I agree that claiming local pages are a must, but the process can seriously be a nightmare. Is anyone else having issues with a Google place page not converting over to a Google local page? It seems that Google doesn't even want to recognize these place pages anymore, but creating a new local page and thus duplicating information seems like Google doesn't like that either.
Thanks for the read!
Hi David
Thank you for useful information i will consider all of this things from next time.
Thank You.Now i got a knowledge about the how ranking factors depends from your post.Thank You for once again.
David@
In current scenario when SEO and Internet marketing don't need an introduction, every one realizing the importance of Online Marketing and running to get clients and bysiness from their wensite. Now most of the companies are targetting their local market also. I am thankful as i enjoyed this post. Its very useful and very practical.
Thanks David,
Still I am facing difficulty to submit my Australian based website in Bing and some major local listing website. They support only US location, any suggestion regarding Australian based website for local listing will be appreciate.
Here is a list of Australian local citation sources I put together some time ago:
https://www.ngsmarketing.com/local-citation-sources-for-australia-germany-new-zealand/
Thanks David for sharing the Local Search Ranking Factors! Local Search is becoming SO IMPORTANT for many business.
Congrats on another quality production of the Local Search Ranking Factors! Every year the contribution from local search experts is wonderful to see, especially the added commentary. While the 2013 LSRFs remained fairly consistent with 2012, I'm looking forward to Google’s focus on personalized search results and the increased weight of social signals in all local search over the next year. Should be another interesting year for local search and everyone involved - never a dull moment.
Interesting read allowing me (as a starter in SEO) to put factors into perspective. Thanks!
I have two questions about social signals that crossed my mind reading the article and comments:
a - If people like/share specific articles, does this then positively influence that particular page or also the domain it's on?
b - For example for Twitter, does Google simply assume that if you have a Twitter widget on your page that the domain on which that page is on goes with the Twitter account it links to? Or basically, how do I ensure Google knows which social accounts are connected to the domain I want the pages to rank for?
...and my client says city doesn't matter and he wants to be in top10 on "keyphrase +city" (30 cities).
This is called a "big info in small pack" David. Thank you for sharing this marvelous piece.
great post !
there are so many sites having no title, description properly, no content but they are in top 5 why this happen? what the reason behind it.
Great post, I've been looking for reliable local factors! Has anyone figured out a good strategy when you have one location but have doznes of cities RIGHT next to you? In Northern Va....we literally have a hunderd cities nearby and local businesses serve all these lcoations, but its been dang hard to rank in any city excpet the actual physicl location.
I am confuse about reviews, how can Google track real reviews as compared to fake reviews over Google places? Is there any local search ranking algorithm to tackle fake reviews?
Hi Rameez,
Most local search sites have review filters in place -- check out this post for more info https://moz.com/blog/review-filters-in-local-search
Great list of the most important factors for ranking locally in Google maps. If it hasn't been posted here already, moz recently put out an even larger list of all the factors for getting ranked. Pretty good read.
Aye... that list was the global / national perspective I believe and I think there's even been a newer update since the one you refer to. Haven't given myself time to read that one yet.
Hi all. I find this survey enlightening, but one factor I would really like to see included is the influence of Google Business View (Photos) on local search ranking. I ask because I provide this service and this is a question I always get. Anecdotally I can say that I generally see a ranking boost but I would like to have a more solid understanding of what the effect actually is? Small? Major? Obviously the value of GBV goes well beyond ranking but still... If anyone would care to offer their observations now it would sure be appreciated.
Thanks David for this bringing such a very useful and informative guide on local ranking.
Very Insightful!
Thanks David! I've always wondered what helps to bring a website up in the google ranks, and you explained it really well in this article.
Thanks David for this handy information! I am really amazed to see that the social signal for local search rankings is still playing a small part which in my opinion should e more keeping the chaos around the digital marketing bubble!
good read!
Thanks for a concise article. I would like to see a local search ranking factors as well.
Thanks for this info. I am trying to take a good long look at local search and this is really useful.
Man, I'm still surprised that social signals are *THAT* low.
Great with a survey, however I am a bit worried about the level of differences across the globe. Will a global tendency be way of compared to a local?
There are no differences to the local ranking algorithm(s) across the globe. The strategies you use to optimize in the US are the same you would use in any country.
I am interested in the impact of schema, google highlighter, as rich snippets and what weight would be given to sites using those tools as opposed to sites not using those tools for local rank. Was there any indication of that in the survey? I might have missed that as part of the examples in the pie slices, maybe?
Most folks felt that schema was a best practice but didn't necessarily influence rankings. Darren Shaw and Mike Blumenthal both included comments to this effect.
Just want to make sure I understand this. You mentioned one of the negative factors is call tracking #s. Is that because they are usually a version of an 800 number or do local tracking numbers matter too. Basically, would 1-800-Flowers be negatively effected if they use their 800 number for their local stores? I know you can have an 800 number for branding and when someone calls that number from a certain area code it goes to their local store. Just wondering if that would be the same negative signal.
IMHO, call-tracking numbers are not negatively affecting the rankings by themselves, i.e. it doesn't really matter if particular used phone number is a call-tracking one, or a regular one. However, call-tracking numbers are usually used TOGETHER with the regular (local or toll-free) phone number of the business and in these cases discrepancy in the business information across the web occurs, which is a major negative ranking factor.
What this all means is that it will be fine to use a call-tracking number if you use it everywhere - across the board (site, citations, G+ Local listing(s)), and you don't plan to stop using it at least in the visible future. Other than that - better don't use call-tracking numbers unless you take very serious precautions.
I have a client that has over 1,000 locals in the US each of their phone numbers is a call tracking number (they use a service called If By Phone) They use this for their store phone number and for citations too. They've had these numbers for numerous years. So really, I guess what you are saying is that the call tracking #s are generally short lived and therefore not a long term strategy for ranking. Is that right? I guess too I am asking about being an 800# vs Local area code # too.
If the call-tracking phone numbers are unique for each location, and if these are the only phone numbers that are used for each location (including online and in the real world), then this should be fine. In any other situation - I would be against it.
Regarding toll-free vs. local numbers, I have never noticed any significant negative impact in using a toll-free number. Obviously, theoretically having a phone number with local area code is one more way to show Google that your business is relevant to that particular location, and that you are targeting exactly this area, but I think the weight of this factor is very small, so I wouldn't sweat too much even if my client was using a toll-free number as the main business number. What might potentially cause problems in these cases, and what is a major no-no, is if a specific toll-free number is used as the main phone number across a number of (or across all) locations.
I agree. The problems come about when a client wants track calls uniquely from the different local channels and tries to use a unique (even if it is a local prefix number) number for each source. E.g. Yp.com, Google, Yahoo Local, Superpages, etc. That's when the data consistency nightmare ensues and, though you had advised against it, you are left holding the mop to try and clean up the end result.
Thanks very much for this information David. I hope it will be possible for Dr. Matt to do a local search ranking factors analysis next year to complement the local expert survey information. While the statistical ranking factors analysis and the SEO survey presented in the 2013 Ranking Factors presentation at MozCon were mostly consistent, there were a couple of factors (like EMDs) that differed.
Paul,
I am working with Dr. Matt on a data science analysis as well. A bit harder to judge how to gather the data and ensuring we're pulling standardized results. Thanks for the feedback!
Their is lot and lot of debate going on about Inbound links and their role in Local Search Ranking.I watch two whiteboard Fridays of David with RAND.They have added some great points like creating a lot and lot of right citations will be helpful but still I am not clear about the role of quality inbound links to Local Search Ranking.
Even in this list.I see the last important ranking factor is inbound links.
Morgan: I was one of the contributors this year and past years. I believe in links strength and do see very positive results on behalf of some smbs. I also vote for them. With all that let me add some caveats that may or may not be reflected within the survey results.
1. Most smb's can't afford the services of great link builders. They are small businesses with limited budgets. Excellent link builders are expensive and the service is expensive.
2. Link building as I'm sure you well know is so much different and much more difficult today than years ago. Google has eliminated so many of the old easier ways to get links and in fact has penalized methods that used to work. In fact in my mind Google currently penalizes methods that in the past in tacitly rewarded. Anchor text is a prime example. Too much anchor text= a penalty (its all relative).
3. Too many cheap easy pointless, non editorial, worthless links = another penalty.
4. Some of my sites have taken hits for some of those efforts that in fact go back years. They worked years ago. Now they cause penalties. Meanwhile I'm the same guy I was years ago. I didn't buy links then or now...but oh yeah...I did get those cheap links.
5. Quality links definitely work today. They work in overall seo and they will benefit local sites. But for little old smb's serving a local market with local products or services they are not easy to obtain in any fashion. Typically these sites don't have a "voice" into the larger world of the web where they might obtain great links for great content.
6. Yet they work. We have found that more recently with all these changes over the past 2 years that we need to do some of the same things great link builders do. We have to create "out of the box" kind of content that trandscends the localness of the site. We might have to do more work to "push" the content into a universe where it will gather links.
7. Now in our cases we have some local sites wherein we have organic visibility above the pac and we even have top of the pac visibility. Those types of rankings speak to the fact that link building works.
8. In some cases with operating businesses there are opportunities to create something from a content basis that can be link worthy opportunistic..but the business operators need to be part of this process and they can't afford the time or produce the effort. To grab those opportunities the seo has to be even more involved.
9. Overall my own experience is that small to medium smb's have a tough time overcoming these obstacles.
10. If you read through the vast amount of commentary by contributors to David's reports you will find suggestions on link building. Its implementing this type of work and getting compensation for some of it that could prevent its more wide spread usage.
At least that is my $0.02 :D
great comment and now I have to read the rest of the comments to see what link building techniques are being reccomended
Thanks for the explaination.Got your point.
no surprises here really. Would be REALLY useful to have the percentages show up on the pie charts w/o hovering. Takes a while to obtain all that data at a glance
Chuck, thanks for that feedback. Will be talking to the design team about this comment as well as the two previous ones about the closeness of colors in the pie charts.
so this is the whole scenario of local search ranking factors. Giving more social signal to the webpage it may increase the authority of the webpage or blog. gathering people is best idea. Review, Poll and commenting.
What I can say except, thanks for the resulting chart. Although the impact of the social signal is not too high, the Google+ would be having more weight than other social signals.
Any plans to complement the local survey with a correlation analysis like was done with the search engine ranking factors, or did the ranking factors correlation encompass local as well as traditional organic?
Thank you David for sharing this amazing post with us, it's really amazes me that there are lots of businesses that are not taking the Google places listing. As per the responses the ranking factors on mobile and desktop are comparatively same. In this scenario of Local search ranking factor providing signals to the social factors will surely enhance the authority of blogs and WebPages. Looking for the next Local search survey information.
Thanks, David!
It’s clear that Google algorithm for Local search is constantly changing, so I consider very important to have access to such surveys. They offer so many important clues to SEO specialists. It’s a fierce competition, so is essential to know what counts and what doesn’t.
I was surprised to see that social factors are still of low significance in ranking, but I believe that, for the future, we have to expect traditional factors to lose significance in favor of those ranking factors that involve social interaction and personal contribution.
As always, I find comments to be very constructive. The few thinks that I did not had very clear from reading your survey, I found well explained in comments.
So, thanks again! Look forward for your next surveys!
Hi,
I have a question. Though off-topic, I need a quick answer so I'm posting it here. Sorry for that.
Should rel="alternate" hreflang="x" markup be added to the home page of different versions say example.com/au , example.com/us , example.com/th , example.com/es or to every inner page of different versions as well?. Please assist.
Hey David totally agrees with you. The ranking factors for local SEO which you have covered in this post is really great to get better ranking in local search engine. Thanks for sharing :)
Appreciate for delightful the instance to put it in concert and thank you very much to the Moz group for the astonishing image of Local Search Ranking.
I always consider Local Search Ranking Factors by D. Mihm. Major Local search ranking factors are.
1) Review Factors
2) Social/Mobile Factors
3) On-Site Factors
4) Off-Site Factors
5) Place Page Factors
Source: https://www.davidmihm.com/local-search-ranking-factors.shtml
We consider him to be the source of the best local ranking factors, too. He's actually the author of this post, and a Moz employee after we acquired Get Listed.
Yes, Keri agree with you..thanks for your reply..
This ranking is in order from strongest factor?
Good post David,
Its interesting to see that having EMD's and PMD's aren't considered a ranking factor here. Despite the loss of importance they used to have, I am still seeing Google favor them in local search.
Once again, your specialist knowledge of local SEO is going to help me loads. Many thanks :)