Navigating Google's Core Algorithm Updates: Key Factors to Consider

After a core algorithm update, rankings can be affected by various factors. It's not just about the quality of content; there are other reasons why the algorithm may have changed and caused a drop in your website rankings.

If you're wondering why your website used to rank well but now it doesn't, it could be due to some of these factors to take into account.

1. Algorithmic Losses Are Not Necessarily Persistent

Sites impacted by the core algorithm update, including the Helpful Content component, do not face a lasting penalty. Google has introduced intricate algorithms and systems over the last decade, with update cycles that can span months, making it challenging for affected sites to regain visibility in search results quickly. While it may seem like a permanent setback, it is not a permanent label of inadequacy that excludes them forever.

Google’s John Mueller recently addressed a query about the impact of being affected by a Core Algorithm Update. He assured that being hit by an update is not permanent and with effort, a website can bounce back from the impact.

On a platform previously known as Twitter, a user inquired:

John Mueller was asked if a site that has been hit by an HCU can increase its traffic again by improving its quality. Some people worry that even with improvements, a site hit by an HCU will always be labeled in a way that prevents it from growing.

Recovering Isn't the Appropriate Term

Yes, websites can experience growth again after being impacted by the "HCU" (now known as the core update). This is not a permanent situation. It may require a significant amount of effort, time, and possibly multiple update cycles, but a revamped and updated website will also see changes in search results.

Recovering from an update is often seen as resetting rankings to regain previous positions. According to John Mueller's response on X, publishers should view algorithmic effects as a need to adapt their website to match the changing web landscape and user preferences.

Mueller shared on Twitter:

In a constantly changing world, making permanent changes may not always be very practical. While it is important to adapt and evolve, the idea of "recovering" implies returning to the exact same state as before, which may not be realistic. The world, user expectations, and the internet are constantly evolving, so it's unlikely things will ever be exactly as they were before.

Algorithmic updates in search engines can be seen as reflecting user expectations in search results. For example, Google's Medic Update a few years ago was a reflection of what users wanted to see when searching for medical topics. The update aimed to provide more scientifically backed search results, aligning with users' expectations for credible information. Websites promoting unscientific remedies were no longer considered relevant after this update.

There are different ways search results are adjusted to match what users are looking for. It all depends on what users are really asking when they search. Some searches prioritize informative websites, while others prioritize review sites.

If your website is affected by a core algorithm update, take a look at the search engine results pages (SERPs) and figure out what the changes mean in terms of relevance. Evaluate whether your site still fits the new definition of relevance.

Thresholds And Ranking Formulas

When it comes to Mueller's response, it's important to note that there is no simple return to the way things were before. This could be due to a slight change in what is considered relevant. Making adjustments to meet user expectations might require a subtle fix or a significant overhaul of the website to improve its ranking in the search engine results.

Mueller also talked about the distinction between continuous algorithmic assessment and the lasting impact of a ranking system that needs an update cycle for a site to bounce back.

A question was raised:

“The simple question is whether you need to wait for a new core update to recover from the HCU. A simple “yes” or “no you can recover anytime” would suffice.”

John Mueller answered:

Not all changes need a new update cycle. Typically, stronger effects will likely call for another update. Core updates encompass various elements.

It's fascinating to consider the impact of these changes on our systems. The evolution of technology continues to shape our digital landscape.

One way to make improvements is by updating a ranking formula along with some thresholds. The impact of the formula update tends to be continuous, while adjusting thresholds may require further updates to be made.

In this context, "thresholds" refer to specific numbers that need extensive work and data recalculations, evaluations, and reviews.

There are two types of effects that can impact a website. One type is a part of a constantly updated ranking formula that can quickly show changes made to a site. This used to be known as rolling updates, where the main algorithm can make instant judgments about a site and adjust the rankings accordingly.

The other type of algorithmic issue involves a large recalculation. This is how the HCU and Penguin algorithms used to work before they were integrated into the core algorithm. They involved complex calculations that seemed to assign scores that were only updated in the next cycle.

4. The Web & Users Change

In another recent exchange on X, John Mueller affirmed that a key to success is keeping track of what users expect.

Success online is not achieved through a one-time secret formula. What works today may not work tomorrow, as the internet landscape and user preferences constantly evolve. Creating content that is both high quality and popular over the long term is a challenging task.

That statement offers these concepts to keep in mind for online success:

The Internet

User desires

How users engage with websites

popularity is not persistent

Those are not algorithm factors. But they could be things that Google picks up on in terms of understanding what users expect to see when they make a search query.

Users' expectation of relevance is my preferred definition. It's not just about "semantic relevance," but more about meeting the expectations of users themselves. Some SEOs and publishers get caught up in analyzing words and phrases, forgetting that the key is how users interpret them.

Mueller also touched on this in a response about why a website may rank differently in different countries. He highlighted how user expectations can vary by location. Ultimately, search ranking relevance is less about technical aspects like semantics and entities, and more about catering to the needs and expectations of users.

He tweeted:

“It’s normal for the search results in countries to vary. Users are different, expectations may vary, and the web is also very different.”

Sometimes, this insight can be useful for publishers who have seen a drop in their rankings after a core algorithm update. It's possible that the algorithm is now aligning with the changing expectations of users.

5. Page-Level Signal

Google’s SearchLiaison confirmed that the Helpful Content component of the core algorithm is usually a signal that is specific to individual pages, but there are also signals that apply to the entire website. In a tweet, he referenced the Helpful Content Update FAQ, which addresses the question:

Our core ranking systems are mainly focused on evaluating individual pages by analyzing different signals and systems to determine their relevance and usefulness. Additionally, we also take into account some signals that apply to the entire site.

Keep An Open Mind

Losing rankings in a core algorithm update can be frustrating. With 25 years of experience in SEO and auditing websites since 2004, I have learned the importance of keeping an open mind when trying to figure out why a site is no longer ranking.

The core algorithm considers various signals, such as helpfulness, relevance to users, relevance to site queries, and overall site quality. It's essential not to fixate on one specific reason for a drop in rankings, as it could be due to other factors or a combination of multiple factors.

Featured Image by Shutterstock/Benny Marty

Editor's P/S:

The article highlights the nuanced nature of website rankings after a core algorithm update. It emphasizes that ranking losses may not be permanent and that websites can recover by adapting to changing user expectations and Google's evolving algorithms. The article also discusses the distinction between continuous algorithmic assessments and large recalculations, and how thresholds and ranking formulas play a role in determining website rankings.

Additionally, the article underscores the importance of considering the ever-changing web landscape and user preferences. It suggests that publishers and SEOs should focus on creating high-quality content that meets users' expectations of relevance, rather than solely relying on technical aspects like semantics and entities. By keeping an open mind and considering various factors, website owners can better understand the reasons for ranking changes and implement effective strategies to improve their visibility in search results.