Thread: Backlink Indexing Case Study

A couple months ago I created this thread asking about different methods and services people recommend for indexing backlinks and since I got several good responses, I thought I'd create a mini case study to see which indexing method really works the best.


For this case study I'm going to be using Senukex to build the links. This will consist of having original articles created (500+ words each), spinning them with The Best Spinner (to at least ~30% uniqueness), then submitting to senukex's list of web2.0 properties and article directories and also creating profile links on both web2.0 sites and forums.

When I manually create campaign projects in senukex (as I will do with this test) I typically get the following results:

Web2.0 property links (social sites) - 30
Article directory links - 20
Web2.0 profile links - 20
Forum profile links - 140
= 210 links per campaign project

However, I believe a larger sample size than 210 links is needed to make a judgement on which indexing method is the best, so I will create 3 campaign projects for each method, for a total of 630 backlinks. I believe that should be a large enough sample size to pull data from.


I plan on testing 6 different methods with this case study to see which produces the best indexing results.

Method 1 - Control group. Google will have to find these links on its own.
Method 2 - Backlinks energizer
Method 3 - Pinging the links via Scrapebox's rapid indexer addon
Method 4 - Bookmarking the links with Bookmarking Demon
Method 5 - Scrapebox - 31,500 url auto approve blog comments (50 blog comments per link)
Method 6 - Linklicious basic account (creating rss feeds out of the links and pinging until crawled)


I plan to provide the results of indexing at increments of 24hrs, 48hrs, 72hrs, 96hrs, 1 week, 2 weeks, 3 weeks, and 4 weeks. At the end of the 4 weeks, we'll determine a winner based on the percentage of links indexed.

If you have any suggestions for the case study, please let me know before I begin the test. I plan to begin the case study in a few days, have to give my writers a few days to create the articles and get everything set up.

Haven't seen that particular diagram, but I have seen several others.
Using licensed copies of all tools used in the test.
Thanks for the feedback.

After reading this thread, where the developer talks about B.E., it looks like it's going to take some time to set it up properly, which means I'll probably have to delay the test until I get it all set up and on auto pilot.

To be continued...

Update - Have the Backlinks Energizer plugin and posting sites set up, have shot some links to the BE posting sites to get them indexed and such. Have had a couple of the web2 posting accounts already banned (big surprise) so I'll have to set them up again.

Will probably give the BE posting sites one more week to marinade before starting the indexing test. Then it should be a fair fight to see which method really is the most effective.

No need for concern, these are for first tier sites, not directly to main site. And come to think of it, I've never heard of a main site getting penalized for blasting with senuke, have you?

Honestly I really ever understood what people mean by linkbait. Is that just supposed to be an interesting blog post on your main site or something??

Edit: nevermind - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Link_bait

I'm thinking about changing this test up a bit, specifically the *types* of links.

Instead of doing Senuke blasts, which are a mixture of different types of links, I'm thinking it may make for a more even playing field if we concentrate on indexing only one type of link, the notoriously difficult to index, forum profile links.

The creation method will be Xrumer, and I'll build 1,000 profile links across 1,000 different forums (none will be made here on fastlane ). Then I'll use the same 6 indexing methods mentioned above to see which method is the most effective.

Thoughts?

Been testing the BLE plugin for the last week or two. Should be ready for the case study.

But I'm wondering if there is enough interest here on the forum to proceed with the test or not? Only 2 people have mentioned that they were looking forward to the results.

If there's not enough interest, that's understandable, I realize there's not a whole lot of SEO interest / topics here. But if you are interested, let me know and I'll either share the results in this thread or PM you.

Originally Posted by cilaes

I think that it is more natural and most likely gives more authority to a link when google finds these links naturally through the original pages.

No doubt it's definitely more natural, but the problem is that some links may *never* get indexed unless you give the spiders a reason to go visit that page. That's the purpose of this test, to try and get those links indexed.

Update on the test -

I went ahead and chose to use forum profiles as the links for this test because they reputation for being very difficult to get indexed, so these methods will definitely have their work cut out for them.

The links built by method vary between 669 to 772, so instead of saying the number of links that were indexed, I'll just use a percentage to gage the results.

I had problems with the Backlinks Energizer blog setup, which have delayed the test (kept getting accounts banned on the web2.0 properties). So I decided to buy a bunch of self-hosted wordpress blogs as I mentioned in this thread and am now using 10 self-hosted wordpress blogs and 4 web2.0 sites for the test. These new self-hosted wordpress blogs may take a few days to get indexed, so I would expect the percentage of links indexed on these to start out slow then pick up steam by the end of the first week or two.

This may not be a perfectly scientific experiment, but it's close enough that if the final results show that one particular method outperforms the others by a wide margin, I think we'll be able to conclude that it is the best indexing method.

Onto the results...


Day 1:

Method ---- Percentage of links indexed

Backlinks Energizer - 4.53%
Bookmarking - 3.77%
Control Group - 2.89%
Linklicious - 3.86%
Pinging - 3.81%
Scrapebox AA Blast - 2.89%

Updating this for the 2 people that are following this thread...

Please ignore the results from the last post because it looks like I had several duplicate URLs that were counted as indexed which skewed the results, but I have since removed all of the dups.

Going to update this thread on a weekly basis for 4 weeks.


Results from week 1:

Method ----- Percentage Of Links Indexed

Backlinks Energizer: 5.44%
Bookmarking: 4.79%
Control Group: 3.44%
Linklicious: 4.19%
Pinging: 3.54%
Scrapebox AA Blast: 3.76%

Originally Posted by superdevo

Kwerner ......Just wanted to let you know to keep up the good work, because I'm definitely interested in your results.

You might also throw BacklinkIndexer (DOT) com in the mix and Lindexed (DOT) com in the mix.

I have 10 BE sites up, but haven't had the time to properly find good (current) RSS feeds and corresponding keywords. The ones that come with the cluster paks seem to be from ancient internet dinosaur times !

Good luck man....I'm gonna keep my eyes posted.

Also, I have a process for indexing from a highly respected source, whom says on average provides an 70 to 90% indexing rate - maybe we can swap tips or pointers at some point.

Thanks for following Superdevo. I've heard of the two services you mentioned, Backlinkindexer seems too pricy IMO for the amount of links they process per month. With Lindexed, from their home page, I don't see any difference between what they do and what Linklicious does (which up to this point Linklicious has not performed well, I probably won't be renewing their service).

I'd be interested in hearing how your source is getting 70 - 90% indexing, although I'm assuming these aren't only for profile links. Either way though, that's a really good indexing rate. Thanks.