Link quality
Is this link any good? A seven-step test for relevance and risk
Most people ask whether a link is toxic. A better question is whether anyone would ever follow it. Relevance usually answers both.
If Google did not exist, would you still want this link on this page? A yes means the link has value. A no means a price cut will not fix it.
The seven checks, in the order we run them
Read three articles on the site
Not the one with your link. Three others. Do they read like a publication with a point of view, or like filler written to hold links?
Compare the topic with yours
Backlink relevance is about subject, audience and geography. A hotel blog linking to a law firm in another country is a mismatch even if the metrics look strong.
Look at organic traffic, not just authority
Domain Rating from Ahrefs or Authority Score from Semrush describes link strength. Traffic tells you if people actually visit. Treat a high DR with almost no traffic as a warning.
Count the outbound links on a typical page
A page that links out to twenty unrelated sites is a link farm in a trench coat. A few outbound links to credible sources is normal.
Check the language and the niche mix
Does the site publish casino, pills and crypto next to gardening? A mixed bag is a pattern, and patterns get discounted.
Glance at spam scores, then forget them
Moz and Ahrefs publish spam-style indicators. They are rough estimates built from site features. Use them to rule things out quickly, never to rule something in.
Place the link where a reader would see it
A link in the body of an article beats one in a footer or a sidebar. Context is what makes it editorial.
What a spam score can and cannot tell you
No third-party score is Google's opinion. Moz's Spam Score, for instance, is a model of features that correlated with penalised sites in Moz's own data. Ahrefs does not publish a single spam number in the same way. Treat any of them as a hint.
The practical use is a filter. If a donor looks bad on topic, traffic and outbound links, a spam score will probably agree. If it looks good on those three and the score is high, look again by hand before you decide.
One more point on toxic links. Google said in 2016 that Penguin 4.0 would devalue bad links rather than punish sites for them. In practice that means most junk pointed at you is simply ignored. Disavowing is for unusual cases, not routine housekeeping.
The same logic applies to your budget. See link building for small business for the split, and the link building timeline for when to review. Short version: judge first, buy second.
Green flags and red flags at a glance
| Look at | Green | Red |
|---|---|---|
| Topic | Close to your business or its customers | Unrelated to anything you sell |
| Traffic | Steady organic visits over time | Almost none, or a sudden cliff |
| Content | Original, edited, with a point of view | Thin, spun, same template everywhere |
| Outbound links | Few, to credible sources | Dozens per page, many commercial |
| Placement | Inside the body copy | Footer, sidebar or a tag page |
Quick answers on link quality
- Is a lower DR link automatically worse?
- No. A small, focused site in your niche can be worth more to you than a famous site that has nothing to do with your customers. Relevance first, authority second.
- Can I check the donor before I pay?
- Yes. Each row in the marketplace shows Domain Rating, organic traffic, referring domains, niche, language and price, and adding to the basket does not charge you.
- How many links can I judge by hand?
- A dozen is realistic in an afternoon. Beyond that, set filters for niche, language and a traffic floor and only inspect what passes.
