Clicky

X

Subscribe to our newsletter

Get the State of Digital Newsletter
Join an elite group of marketers receiving the best content in their mailbox
* = required field
Daily Updates

Forget Pagerank and Mozrank, Majestic Launches “Flow Metrics”

14 May 2012 BY

13 Flares Twitter 0 Facebook 0 Google+ 13 LinkedIn 0 Buffer 0 Email -- StumbleUpon 0 Pin It Share 0 Filament.io 13 Flares ×

Linkbuilders love Pagerank and Mozrank. Even though Pagerank has no influence on rankings it shows us what a site and a link on that site can be “worth”. But is it the best way to figure that out?

Majestic SEO probably has the most insights on the worth of any link out there since they have the biggest database of links on the web. Majestic SEO feels Mozrank and Pagerank as well as the AC Rank they have been using could use some improvement. So they decided to develop a new quality metrics “Flow Metrics” with two “scores”: Citation Flow and Trust Flow.

The new metrics can be a revolutionary metric which will show much more of the strength of specific pages.

Majestic’s flow metrics is special. From their release:

“The new methodology differs dramatically from others previously used, as the methodology is capable of flowing ANY characteristic through links, starting with a known characteristic set. Initially, the main improvements on Majestic SEO’s ACRank model are that the new metrics allow a charactersitic to flow through internal links as well as external links, using a self decaying algorithm.”

Scores will be between 0 and 99, making it much more precise than for example Pagerank and “giving a much stronger correlation than previously seen between Citation Flow and Google’s own metric”

Majestic feels Citation Flow is much stronger than Pagerank for example since its updated more frequently, namely daily and has a much more ‘genuine’ view on the links since it is not affected by any Google penalties.

The new measurement method will also make it more interesting to compare linkprofiles of sites. See below the graph of the link profiles of the BBC (green) and the Guardian (red). It shows both of them have a lot of trust “but the BBC has somewhat more breadth and variety in its profile”.

Dixon Jones of Majestic is very excited, he told State of Search:

“I am convinced this is a dramatic improvement in how URLs are analyzued using links. The methodolgy is better than (say) Page Rank in many regards and should give the community massive insights into search that were just not possible technologically until today”

The Majestic Flow Metrics could be making a big impact on how sites can be rated. What are your thoughts on it?

AUTHORED BY:
h

Bas van den Beld is a speaker, trainer and online marketing strategist. Bas is the founder of Stateofdigital.com. -- You can hire Bas to speak, train or consult.
  • http://www.barbie-games.net/ Marucus Radu

    Waw. This are some great news. I expected them to present something new considering the rate at which they developed lately. They really have demonstrated that they are the best site explorer at this moment. I’m looking forward to test this update.

  • http://www.a1webstats.com/ Andy

    I have a huge amount of respect for Majestic SEO, including this new addition.  However, over and over again I have to question the logic behind links being seen as a measure of ‘quality’.

    Yes, I can understand it that links to the BBC are probably ‘genuine’ but generally it’s utter madness for a websites search positioning to be influenced by links gained (when we all know how engineered the majority of them are).

    When is it time to stop and think “where’s the quality in allowing ‘links’ to influence ranking so much?”. 

    So, you have two companies – company A and company B.  Company B provides a better service/product than company A but company A has pumped resources in linking and so ranks better than company B.   Does it serve the potential buyers (of services/products) for them to find company A higher in the search results, then to be disappointed with a service/product that’s of lower standard than company B (who just doesn’t happen to be good at optimisation)?

    The whole system of credibility through links is utter madness in my view.  Roll on the day when big players like Google realise that they can roll together organic and paid into a system that focuses on quality of services/products provided.  That day is a long way off all the time that it’s so easy to make money from PPC of course!

  • http://www.a1webstats.com/ Andy

    I have a huge amount of respect for Majestic SEO, including this new addition.  However, over and over again I have to question the logic behind links being seen as a measure of ‘quality’.

    Yes, I can understand it that links to the BBC are probably ‘genuine’ but generally it’s utter madness for a websites search positioning to be influenced by links gained (when we all know how engineered the majority of them are).

    When is it time to stop and think “where’s the quality in allowing ‘links’ to influence ranking so much?”. 

    So, you have two companies – company A and company B.  Company B provides a better service/product than company A but company A has pumped resources in linking and so ranks better than company B.   Does it serve the potential buyers (of services/products) for them to find company A higher in the search results, then to be disappointed with a service/product that’s of lower standard than company B (who just doesn’t happen to be good at optimisation)?

    The whole system of credibility through links is utter madness in my view.  Roll on the day when big players like Google realise that they can roll together organic and paid into a system that focuses on quality of services/products provided.  That day is a long way off all the time that it’s so easy to make money from PPC of course!

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_MVS4RMXQV47QVVKWJU7M2CJ7ZE Dixon Jones

      Hi Andy,
      Thanks for the input. I’m the marketing director at Majestic – so thought I would address your point. You are absolutely right that a link does not necessarily equate to “quality”. This is really why we looked at flow metrics in this new way. The thing is, we are now using links to parse a signal originating from a known set. So Citation flow flows AC Rank – which does seem to correlate to Page Rank – so that’s a nice coincidence. However – Trust flow is more specialized – because it ONLY flows links through from sites that are already trusted. So a page can easily have a high citation flow, but no trust. No THAT might be a spam signal ;)
      Look at it another way. Links are about relationships. There’s strong ones and weak ones. In the end, though, there are only TWO ways a person gets to your site. They either type yoursite.com into a browser…..

      ….or they click on….

      a link.

      That’s why link maps won’t go away.

      • Alexandru Saru

        What tracking system could be developed to count also the browser bookmarks into equation? As one genuine sign of quality a website could show is that a visitor would finally bookmark it in his/her personal browser and would come back later to read more.

      • http://www.candleforex.com/ CandleForex

        I know I am 9 months late…but here is to hoping you reply.

        Basically I was going to suggest if MajesticSEO would consider adding bounce rates when factoring in TrustRank.

        The logic is spammy websites will have a high bounce rate, and quality sites (in theory anyway) will not.

  • Pingback: Identify "bad" links with Linkresearchtools Power*Trust update - State of Search()

  • Pingback: Identify "bad" links with Linkresearchtools Power*Trust update | Tin Surf24h()

  • Pingback: News about majestic seo issue #1 | SEO Software News()

  • Pingback: majestic seo – nyheter | seo & sem()

13 Flares Twitter 0 Facebook 0 Google+ 13 LinkedIn 0 Buffer 0 Email -- StumbleUpon 0 Pin It Share 0 Filament.io 13 Flares ×

Nice job, you found it!

Now, go try out the 12th one:

Use Google Translate to bypass a paywall...

Ran into a page you can't read because it is blocked or paywalled? Here's a quick trick (doesn't always work, but often does!):

Type the page into Google translate (replace the example with the page you want):

http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=ja&tl=en&u=http://example.com/

How about that!?

Like this 12th trick? Tell others they need to look for this trick on our page: http://www.stateofdigital.com/search-hacks-marketers/

Or Tweet: Found the secret 12th one!