October 18, 2016 at 12:05 pm #12015
For SEO Audits, Keyword Analysis, Backlink Help, Reporting etc.
Of the two mentioned (Moz Pro & SEMrush Guru), what would be your preference and why?
Thank you for those that answer in advance!
-RayOctober 19, 2016 at 5:09 am #12016
The keyword tool for MozPro is pretty dang cool. I’ve been using it for a while now. For backlink help, the Moz index can be a little incomplete. I use Majestic and CognitiveSEO to fill the gap. I use MozPro and like itOctober 19, 2016 at 8:03 am #12017
We use SEMRush mostly for competitive research. I agree with Daryl that Keyword Explorer is pretty good.
For backlinks our research has shown that Majestic’s TrustFlow and other metrics appear to be highly tuned to Google’s algo. We also like AHREF’s because it has one of the nicer UIs (certainly v. Majestic) and it’s helpful to get supplemental link info from another tool when doing link audits. We have heard from Moz that they are investing more in OSE so hopefully that tool will get a lot better in the near term.
We don’t use SEMRush’s site audit tools much even though we have them set up. You can pretty much get the same/better info from Google Search Console & ScreamingFrog, particularly for smaller sites. I guess it’s ok for reporting but these are the kinds of reports we tend to see cause clients’ eyes to glaze over 🙂October 20, 2016 at 8:50 am #12033
Thanks Daryl and Andrew!
-RayOctober 20, 2016 at 10:18 am #12044
I use SEMrush, aHrefs, GSC, GA, AdWords, maybe BWT. I started paying for Moz again to test the keyword tool. Seems promising for identifying content gap opportunities.
Opensite explorer has grown to be rather pointless to over the past 4 years. The index is small and stale from my experience. We use aHrefs and Majestic for backlink analysis. We use your tool (Cognitive) + Majestic + aHrefs + GSC + BWT, and Moz (though usually pointless activity) for penguin penalties.
Onsite & Auditing
Screaming Frog, GSC, BWT
I like aHref’s UIOctober 21, 2016 at 6:34 am #12052
One other thing to consider…
With Penguin going real-time, we’ll be adding some time to review link profiles on a more regular basis that we used to.
The best two tools I’ve seen to do this are CognitiveSEO and Link Research Tools. CognitiveSEO is better priced for sure, and both tools really need Majestic to pump up the number of links they are evaluating.
A lot of our clients are local (plumbers, doctors, etc) and its easy for them to get sub-standard links without even knowing.
Anyone else using something diff to do this?October 21, 2016 at 8:27 am #12053
CognitiveSEO probably gives you the best bang for the buck. The problem we have found with all of these “bad link” detector tools is too many false positives. LRT once classified a link a client got from the NYT as spam – which I guess it is depending on your politics.
In our Local SEO Ranking Factors Study we found that Majestic metrics, particularly Trust Flow correlate strongly with positive Local Pack ranking. We use it as our go-to link analysis tool with supplemental info from AHRefs and GSC. When you are dealing with say under 1K links I think these are better than the automated tools. Your mileage may vary of course.October 25, 2016 at 5:31 am #12095
Andrew – Do you make your link “cuts” at the page level or domain level? Are you looking at the ratio to TF/CF and the minimum TF?
Just wanting to validate here….thanks!October 25, 2016 at 7:05 am #12100
I think in reading this thread, you’ll see that nearly everyone uses multiple tools to achieve their goals. It is doubtful that you will find one tool or dashboard that does everything well for you. So first think about what information is most valuable for you, try out different tools that do it and put together your own toolkit. But don’t keep researching and trying new tools and upgrading your toolkit when you find something that does the job better for you.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.