e're still getting mostly similar results

[zihadhasan019]

Path and filename are slightly positive, which also fits with our expectations. It's also important to note that on this chart some lines dip below 0 on the "mean derivative of uber" y-axis in the 20-25 ranking position range. This suggests that for those results, the keyword use may actually be hurting them. Looking into some sample results, we can see that a number of the URLs in that 20-25 range seem to be trying too hard.


They're using the keyword multiple times in th email lists australia e domain/path/filename and fit with what many SEOs call "spammy-looking." It could certainly be a weakness in our model's accuracy, but we think it's also likely that a lot of pages would actually benefit from being a bit less aggressive with their URL keyword stuffing. In this next chart, we can see the standard deviation error bars. You can see that we're more confident that in the top results, employing keywords in these URL features won't hurt and is likely to help, while in the latter portion of the results, we've got a bit less confidence about the negative effects.





Let's turn our attention to those pesky H(x) tags again, and see if the ranking model has more to say about their impact/value. W. It appears that H1-H4 tags are not great places to use keywords. As with the URL features, they seem to help a tiny bit (even less than URL features, actually), then have a very tiny negative - flat effect in the latter SERPs. Even with the error bars, this is fairly convincing evidence that H(x) tags just don't provide much value.