Is Reciprocal Linking Still Effective?

March 24th, 2008 | 30 comments

A few years back reciprocal linking was a HUGE thing. Just about any site you saw had a “resources” or “partners” page that was full of links. The idea was that you get as many Webmasters as possible to put your link on their resources page and in return you would put their link on your resources page. After some time you would have hundreds, even thousands of links pointing to your site.

The process was pretty easy and it actually worked! This was my primary link building technique when I first started online and I actually obtained many somewhat competitive rankings with Google.

That was then and this is now!

This type of reciprocal linking is no longer effective and can actually accrue penalties toward your website(s.) Google and other SE’s can very easily find these pages and discount them. But, that doesn’t mean all reciprocal linking is ineffective!

Google states on their “link schemes” page that “Excessive reciprocal links or excessive link exchanging (“Link to me and I’ll link to you.”)” is in violation of their Webmaster guidelines. Notice the word “excessive” being used twice in there.

This means that selective link exchanges between quality sites is not against their guidelines and whether it is or not I can tell you for a fact that it does work!

The “blogosphere” is a perfect example of this. Analyze any “A-list” blog and I almost guarantee that 50% or more of the outgoing links are to sites that have linked to them sometime in the past…that’s a reciprocal link!

What Constitutes a “Good” Link Exchange?

The first thing to understand is that a “resources” page should not contain hundreds of links. I don’t even have a page like this on most of my sites, but those that do contain very few links. I only use these pages as kind of a bonus “I’ll give you a link “here” too.”

The best way to do a link exchange is contextual. Links that appear within content are much more “natural” looking than sidebar and footer links.

You’ll obviously want to insure that the site you’re linking to is not in a “bad neighborhood” and doesn’t use any kind of “black-hat” tactics.

A contextual link on a good page that is receiving some authority is considered, in my opinion, a good link exchange.

Another thing I like to do is triangular links where site A links to site B, site B links to site C and site C completes the triangle by linking to site A. This requires you have other sites that you can use to leverage the trade, but it’s very effective. I wrote more about that in a previous post titled “Leveraging Pre-Existing Sites to Build Authority.”

All-in-all I’ve been able to get many of my own sites ranked pretty highly to this day with selective link exchanges. It’s becoming harder and harder to find others who will accept these trades, but if you’re persistent and can write a convincing, personal, non-spammy email to them you have a good chance of obtaining these links.

Also, when attempting to do a link exchange with a site that has much more authority than yours, it’s important to balance the trade. Offering a unique article or multiple links in return for one link on their more authoritative site will often work.

Combine selective link exchanges with a solid article marketing campaign and you’ll see higher rankings!

photo credit: mikemindel

30 comments

Ambrose Duperon
24th March, 2008 at 5:29 pm

Josh
Slow and steady wins the race.
The Upfront Mortgage Broker
24th March, 2008 at 5:33 pm

Josh,

Thanks for the honest insight into what you did in the past that worked as well as what you are currently doing now regarding links.

Your explanation of contextual links is right on. You supply us with a good reason to include them vs having a “blogroll” or “resources” page that has (as you mentioned) 100′s of links.

Thanks for the info.

Respectfully,
The Upfront Mortgage Broker
Joe Bartolotta
Jason Hulott
24th March, 2008 at 5:52 pm

Hi Josh

Good call. The other thing to do is look at how some of the big boys handle linking.

Look at the BBC (http://www.bbc.co.uk) for example and visit a story page. They have a related links section. You could do this kind of thing too. As well and contextual keep any recip links relevant. No point in having australian sheet metal working links on your mortgage site!

Keep up the good posts! Love the free guide BTW!

Jason
Abhishek
24th March, 2008 at 6:14 pm

Josh,

What a co-incidence! I blogged about the very same topic on 23/2/2008.

It is true that long link pages are a thing of the past and if you are still doing it – then the best way is to make a directory and organize them properly.
Maurice (TheCaymanHost)
24th March, 2008 at 6:42 pm

Hi Josh,

as this is the first post for which I got an email list notification I thought I should say something :-0)

It is amazing how things have changed as you rightly point out and I know we have engaged in reciprocity ourselves and hopefully to both our benefit. I know it is something I should pursue with more vigour however and your post is a timely reminder of one more task to schedule!

Many free web directories still work on this basis but I’m not sure if blatant links to too many of them are a good idea or you do end up looking like a link farm. The catch of wanting directory listings in many cases and I prefer to stick to those who don’t require a link back.

I need to find more webmasters like you who are agreeable to organic looking linking within content
Asia'h Epperson Fan
24th March, 2008 at 7:55 pm

Josh,

I completely agree with you. Trading links can, and has hurt my sites before. I wasn’t doing anything excessive or “illegal” however you do have to be careful who you associate with.

It will be interesting to see what works and doesn’t work anymore in two years.
Carol Smith
24th March, 2008 at 8:30 pm

Since I am a new kid on the block, I have been quite busy attacking my list of topics to study.

Linking, social networking, web 2.0 is at the top of the list so I was pleased to see your notice about this post.

One point especially hit home with me. I just couldn’t seem to figure out how come someone with a “more active and authoritative” would want to link to a beginner. I know the benefit it would be to me. But certainly not reciprocal in benefit.

Your post gave me several points to think about — Thanks.
Internet Junkie (9 comments.)
24th March, 2008 at 8:38 pm

I was a bit worried about Google’s penalization of reciprocal linking: I leave comments on a lot of blogs and if I really like a blog i like to link to it as well; after reading this post I feel a bit better about this.
I loved your $5 formula, I even blogged about it; keep’em coming!
Stephanie (2 comments.)
24th March, 2008 at 9:05 pm

Josh,

Thanks for the clear review of linking. As a newbie to the internet, I am always reading and unfortunately there is so much out there that you don’t always know what works and what doesn’t. Your willingness to share techniques that you actually use is of great value to the readers of this blog!

Thanks,
Stephanie
David Cooley
24th March, 2008 at 9:53 pm

The key word these days should be “organic”, if you follow what Google does it seems to make sense.

If you leave a comment on an official Google blog, the link is “nofollow”.

If they link to you in the content of the blog, then it is a full link without the “nofollow”, so you get the advantage of the PageRank.

If you are going to link in a “blogroll” type of list, it would make sense to use “nofollow”.

When in doubt, follow the leader!
Josh Spaulding
24th March, 2008 at 10:07 pm

@ Ambrose – In way you’re correct But not too slow. Authority and quality are also import.

@ Joe – Glad you enjoyed it!

@ Jason – It’s always a good think to look at the more authoritative sites, but when were talking about sites on the level of BBC I don’t think it’s a good thing to compare. Companies like this will never need any type of link-building campaign because they get loads of links naturally. I didn’t see their related links section, but I would bet the house that they aren’t using it to trade links

@ Abhishek – Crazy how that happens isn’t it a web directory will work, but it’s not going to get you many good link exchanges. The links are so deep into the sites it’s not going to drive much authority to the site you link to. So you may get some webmasters who don’t know any better to accept a link exchange where their link goes into your web directory, but those of us who know better are going to deny that quickly.

@ Maurice – Well thanks for saying something It’s always good to hear from you.

In regards to link directories I’ve never spent too much time on them. There are a select few that will give you much authority at all, DMOZ, Yahoo (paid) and a couple others and they’re either hard as hell to get into or costs more than they’re worth. Your average director will not yield much authority at all. I’ll occasionally submit to a handfull of them just to get a niche site indexed, but for ranking purposes I haven’t seen them do much good at all.

@ Asia’h – Yep, bad neighborhoods can definitely hurt you. It’s all about how you do it and with whom you link.

@ Carol – Glad to help. It’s all about providing something that is worth the trade. You may not have a site that has the authority they are looking for, but you can certainly come up with something of value. That may be a unique article, a series of unique articles, offering technical skills etc. just use your imagination. Most people (even “newbies”) can come up with something appealing to most everyone.

@ Internet – Yeah, I definitely wouldn’t worry about linking to other bloggers where you’ve left comments! It may be reciprocal, but it’s natural! If Google penalized you for that they would have some serious issues to work out.

@ Stephanie – Glad to help. Just keep reading and taking action. You’d be suprised how much you can learn in just a few months when you’re really interested in it and try your best at succeeding!

@ David – Actually the rel=”nofollow” attribute was adopted by Google to control spam in the comment field. If you closely moderate your comments you should be able to give your commentators a little “link love” without harm.

Using the rel=”nofollow” attribute in your blogroll would actually go against Googles philosophy in a big way, as your blogroll is supposed to be a section of your blog where you list blogs you like to read.

nofollow should be used to control your own internal linking and for user generated links that you can’t control. You control the comments left on your blog and your blogroll, so there should be no need for the rel=”nofollow” attribute in either of those.
Evan
24th March, 2008 at 10:45 pm

Thanks Josh.

I have a blog with a fairly short blogroll. My criterion is that the site I link to has to be in my niche and high quality. (I guess google doesn’t control for that kind of thing though.)
David Cooley
24th March, 2008 at 11:17 pm

Josh, good points, I am just sharing what they do on their blogs, which should be a good indicator.
Henbima
25th March, 2008 at 1:53 am

Thanks Josh, it give me a better understanding about link exchange. What do you think about LinkMetro.com Josh?
I did make few link exchange for one of my niche site.

Do you think i should keep or eradicate them all?

Thanks!
Generic Heartgard (1 comments.)
25th March, 2008 at 2:00 am

Josh,

One of the things I’ve always admired about guys like you and Jonathan Leger is that you speak from experience.

You don’t talk about what might work. You talk about what used to work, why it no longer works, and what works right this very minute (which is what matters).

Thanks
Jason Hulott
25th March, 2008 at 3:50 pm

Sorry Josh,
What I meant to say was that on each story page they have a section within that story page with related outbound links. I realise that the BBC don’t need to link build like the rest of us but it was just an idea for incorporating relevant link exchanges on relevant pages of your own sites.
Josh Spaulding
25th March, 2008 at 5:13 pm

@ Jason – Ah ok I understand what you meant now. Yeah, it’s a good strategy. Related links that really will help the user and at the same time help your own link building efforts, as hopefully they accepted a link exchange.
Alec (6 comments.)
25th March, 2008 at 11:06 pm

Even vanilla reciprocal linking does still work. On theme. Quality sites.
Mark (4 comments.)
26th March, 2008 at 11:50 am

Josh, I have gone back and read your post and the comments again. I have accepted my whoopin, and will attempt to fix that problem as soon as Google will let me. Thanks.
Kim - SEO Results (3 comments.)
2nd April, 2008 at 6:12 am

Hi
Thanks for an interesting read, im new in the game of link building so if you have any other links I cant look at to learn more that would be really great
Thanks
Maria Reyes-McDavis
3rd April, 2008 at 7:00 pm

Josh,
Great post, as usual. You’ve nailed a complicated search engine marketing and optimization topic – even for the newbie!

Great job!
Maria
Best Posts For The Week Of March 24th, 2008
6th April, 2008 at 4:36 pm

[...] 4. Is Reciprocal Linking Still Effective? [...]
Josh Spaulding
10th April, 2008 at 7:05 pm

@ Alec – hmm never heard of that one. What exactly is “vanilla reciprocal linking?”
Joanne (4 comments.)
18th April, 2008 at 5:39 pm

Hi Josh,

Thanks for all the tips on link building.

Have a question on submitting to website directories for backlinks.

I read in a few places that this technique is no longer effective.

Can you share your thoughts on this?

Best,
Joanne
Josh Spaulding
18th April, 2008 at 10:12 pm

@ Joanne – There are very few Web Directories that will help you out much in regards to building authority, but they can and will help in getting pages indexed.
Proof that Manual Link Building still works!
10th December, 2008 at 3:18 pm

[...] web directories – article directories – Reciprocal Linking – forums and blogs – my own [...]
Site promotion tactics - how to get free traffic - make money blogging | make money blogging
26th December, 2008 at 1:15 pm

[...] Josh spaulding explains if reciprocal link building is still effective [...]
trade show booths (10 comments.)
23rd January, 2009 at 5:09 pm

hey Josh,
I think the issue is not “reciprocal” but “relevant”. Relevant reciprocal links should count. Non-relevant (reciprocal or one way) links should not.
The problem to my mind is what is “excessive”? Google is ok with some promotion, but not “too much”. Any idea where the line is?
~ Steve, purveyor of fine portable trade show booths
Josh Spaulding
23rd January, 2009 at 5:16 pm

@ Steve – irrelevant links shouldn’t count, but they do just as much as relevant links in some cases contrary to what most forum lovers will say.

I think their thoughts are that there will be some reciprocal linking naturally within niches, especially tight niches. Where the line is drawn I don’t know, but I’ve done some serious link exchanges and have only benefited from them.
trade show booths (10 comments.)
23rd January, 2009 at 5:51 pm

hey Josh,
That was a fast reply…
I agree that there is a big different between the way things “should” be and the way things really are!
I go back and forth between thinking relevance matters. It all depends on the SERPS, and there are times it appears that non-relevant links are equal to what should be relevant links. It drives me mad…
~ Steve, purveyor of fine portable trade show booths