Do exact match domain names still kick ass?

[ChrisS]

By exact match I mean the domain matches the keyword phrase exactly. For example, midgettossing.com would be an exact match for the keywords "midget tossing".

A while back Aaron Wall blogged about it and he said that, judging by his tests, google gives a lot of extra weight to exact match domains.

That was in 2006. I'm wondering if anyone knows if Google has changed the algorithm since then?

On a related note, people often link to your site with your URL only. So if your URL happens to be the exact keywords, you'll be getting more of a boost in the search engines then you would otherwise. So a good exact match domain name make a lot of sense.

In my limited experience exact match domain names are very easy to rank highly. I'd love to hear some opinions about this though.

 

[xmcp123]

By exact match I mean the domain matches the keyword phrase exactly. For example, midgettossing.com would be an exact match for the keywords "midget tossing".

A while back Aaron Wall blogged about it and he said that, judging by his tests, google gives a lot of extra weight to exact match domains.

That was in 2006. I'm wondering if anyone knows if Google has changed the algorithm since then?

On a related note, people often link to your site with your URL only. So if your URL happens to be the exact keywords, you'll be getting more of a boost in the search engines then you would otherwise. So a good exact match domain name make a lot of sense.

In my limited experience exact match domain names are very easy to rank highly. I'd love to hear some opinions about this though.

Yup. In my experience, even partial match provide a decent bump.
The holy trifecta of easy as shit things to do for rank:
Title tag, domain name, filename, all containing keywords.
Big ass bump just from that.

Of course, that's not even half the battle, but it's a nice start.

 

[thegrin]

i think it will always have a good weight (but i wonder how much disadvantage are .info and other shitty tld's) couse domains are uniques.
2 pages could have the same weight for google as far links, pr, keywords saturation and proximity but only one of the 2 can have a domain that match with the searched keyword.

 

[xmcp123]

i think it will always have a good weight (but i wonder how much disadvantage are .info and other shitty tld's) couse domains are uniques.
2 pages could have the same weight for google as far links, pr, keywords saturation and proximity but only one of the 2 can have a domain that match with the searched keyword.

If you want to believe Matt Cutts(which many don't, understandably), there is no weight given.

However, this is contradicted by reasearch of "local" tlds, (.ie, .uk, etc).
Also, I'd be surprised to see .cn's not be penalized somehow. Or at least dealt with with more scrutiny.

 

[johu]

I'm about to try two experiments (same niche) with exact match, gTld domains (.tc and .nu). One is a one-word term, the other is a two-word. I had started a test with .ws a few months back, but that fell apart due to lack of devotion on my part. Just trying to figure out whether a blog format or site format would be most beneficial, but if it's a success, I'll definitely report back.

 

[emp]

Of course an exact match gives points.

::emp::

 

[ScottDaMan]

In my experience, exact match .com's kick major ass. I've beat top ranking sites for a keyword that has one million results with just an exact match domain with good content and focused title tag with a few backlinks from social networking. Impressive stuff.

 

[Mahzkrieg]

i use exact-match or even partial-match dot coms on all my offers. if im having trouble deciding between different offers to promote, i'll pick the one in which i get a better domain for.

i don't even know why people use anything other than .coms, .nets or even .orgs (besides locality). with a little bit of thinking, i've always found myself a good domain for all my projects. i own all dot coms, too. never bought a .net or .org. my .com's perform a lot better than my subdomains. it's a measley <$10 investment. it's the least you can do.

 

[StarkReality]

If you want to believe Matt Cutts(which many don't, understandably), there is no weight given.

It's definitely a lie, especially for low to medium competitive terms an exact match domain almost instantly ranks extremely well, even if it has just a few good incoming links.

 

[johu]

i don't even know why people use anything other than .coms, .nets or even .orgs (besides locality). with a little bit of thinking, i've always found myself a good domain for all my projects. i own all dot coms, too. never bought a .net or .org. my .com's perform a lot better than my subdomains. it's a measley <$10 investment. it's the least you can do.

I'm going for some really high traffic terms here - For instance, a site like dating.com/net/org is taken (and in pretty much all tlds), but you'll probably find 1 or 2 where it's open (just using dating as an example).

 

[kjb1891]

Here's something that I always wondered about exact match domains. Many people nowadays say to vary your inbound anchor text to look more organic, but what if you have all of your backlinks with the same anchor text which just so happens to be your domain as an exact match keyword?

For example, if you had "www.some-keyword.com". Would Google penalize you at all for having nearly all of your link anchor text as "Some Keyword"?

 

[maximus]

Always spend the extra $9 on an exact match .com. I do it for .org's and .net's too. Definitely a lot of extra weight.

I still haven't figured out .info's or hyphens.

 

[MyOwnDemon]

For example, if you had "www.some-keyword.com". Would Google penalize you at all for having nearly all of your link anchor text as "Some Keyword"?

This question comes up all the time and the answer is NO unless google sees the links as spam (ie, you're getting over 10k links per day from spammy sites). If you're getting links on normal sites, then don't worry about it.

 

[xmcp123]

Always spend the extra $9 on an exact match .com. I do it for .org's and .net's too. Definitely a lot of extra weight.

I still haven't figured out .info's or hyphens.

Hyphens in root domains make me uneasy. Although subdomains i've seen perform quite well.
Hyphens PROBABLY work fine though. For whatever reason, I doubt my own observation on this as biased due to how spammy they look.

 

[smaxor]

Absolutely! Matt Cutts is 100% full of shit on that or is fed rancid info by the PR department about it. Exact match makes a BIG BIG difference.

 

[Slevin]

Has any one tested the ability of phrase match .nets against .coms? Would key-phrase.com rank better than keyphrase.net? Or would no there be no preference. Although i would prefer no hyphens for typeins, i'm not sure if there is extra trust given to .coms. Thanks

 

[xmcp123]

It's definitely a lie, especially for low to medium competitive terms an exact match domain almost instantly ranks extremely well, even if it has just a few good incoming links.

I was responding to someone asking if TLD mattered for exact match, not about whether or not exact match matters.

 

[StarkReality]

This question comes up all the time and the answer is NO unless google sees the links as spam (ie, you're getting over 10k links per day from spammy sites). If you're getting links on normal sites, then don't worry about it.

True, but a little variation is safer, especially if you get alot of links fast...shot down a social bookmarking site of mine, although the links weren't spammy.

 

[Andrew]

Absolutely! Matt Cutts is 100% full of shit on that or is fed rancid info by the PR department about it. Exact match makes a BIG BIG difference.