Google Adds Page Load Time To Its Rankings, But It’s Weighted Too Lightly To Make A Difference

Written by Frank Hayes
May 6th, 2010

As expected, Google has officially added a page-loading-speed factor to its search ranking algorithm. In theory, this change means that faster retail pages will show up higher in Google search results. But in reality, that’s not going to be the case because Google set the weight for page loads as extremely light. In short: It’s all just for show.

To be fair, that’s not necessarily a bad thing. Google today has the largest slice, by far, of the search engine pie. New Hitwise stats released Wednesday (May 5) give Google 71.4 percent of the search market, compared with 14.96 percent for Yahoo, 9.43 percent for Bing and 2.18 percent for Ask. (Interestingly enough, of those four engines, Google is the only one that gained marketshare from March to April. Ask, meanwhile, lost a painful 37 percent in that same month.)

When any market leader speaks of its secret sequencing sauce, retailers are going to listen very carefully. And if that knowledge causes some to accelerate their pages slightly, all the better. But if the goal is to materially change Google rankings, that information won’t help much.

“We still put much more weight on factors like relevance, topicality, reputation, value-add, etc.–all the factors that you probably think about all the time. Compared to those signals, site speed will carry much less weight,” Google Software Engineer Matt Cutts wrote in his personal blog.

“Fewer than one percent of search queries will change as a result of incorporating site speed into our ranking. That means that even fewer search results are affected, since the average search query is returning 10 or so search results on each page,” he said. “The fact that not too many people noticed the change is another reason not to stress out disproportionately over this change.”

Search engine optimization (SEO) consultants have jumped on the news that page-loading speed is now a part of Google’s algorithm, arguing that optimizing for site performance is just as critical as any other SEO improvement.

“Instead of wasting time on keyword meta tags, you can focus on some very easy, straightforward, small steps that can really improve how users perceive your site,” Cutts said. But, he added, most retailers already routinely take these steps.

With such a small weight given to site speed, the only way for an already tight site to get a boost in Google search results is through a big jump in performance from faster servers, more bandwidth or a completely re-architected site. And that won’t be easy or cheap.

But it doesn’t mean optimizing for page-loading speed is a waste of time. Better performance means happier customers. And those customers are likely to notice better site performance a lot sooner than Google will.


2 Comments | Read Google Adds Page Load Time To Its Rankings, But It’s Weighted Too Lightly To Make A Difference

  1. Jestep Says:

    I think the lack of weight is to point out that a server is OK as long as it is reasonably fast. Not everybody’s hosting on a super computer with a 10/1000 direct internet connection and that’s OK.

    They’re trying to slightly devalue sites that load like geocities used to.

  2. Brian Says:

    Expect the weighting change over time as Google analyzes its impact.


StorefrontBacktalk delivers the latest retail technology news & analysis. Join more than 60,000 retail IT leaders who subscribe to our free weekly email. Sign up today!

Most Recent Comments

Why Did Gonzales Hackers Like European Cards So Much Better?

I am still unclear about the core point here-- why higher value of European cards. Supply and demand, yes, makes sense. But the fact that the cards were chip and pin (EMV) should make them less valuable because that demonstrably reduces the ability to use them fraudulently. Did the author mean that the chip and pin cards could be used in a country where EMV is not implemented--the US--and this mis-match make it easier to us them since the issuing banks may not have as robust anti-fraud controls as non-EMV banks because they assumed EMV would do the fraud prevention for them Read more...
Two possible reasons that I can think of and have seen in the past - 1) Cards issued by European banks when used online cross border don't usually support AVS checks. So, when a European card is used with a billing address that's in the US, an ecom merchant wouldn't necessarily know that the shipping zip code doesn't match the billing code. 2) Also, in offline chip countries the card determines whether or not a transaction is approved, not the issuer. In my experience, European issuers haven't developed the same checks on authorization requests as US issuers. So, these cards might be more valuable because they are more likely to get approved. Read more...
A smart card slot in terminals doesn't mean there is a reader or that the reader is activated. Then, activated reader or not, the U.S. processors don't have apps certified or ready to load into those terminals to accept and process smart card transactions just yet. Don't get your card(t) before the terminal (horse). Read more...
The marketplace does speak. More fraud capacity translates to higher value for the stolen data. Because nearly 100% of all US transactions are authorized online in real time, we have less fraud regardless of whether the card is Magstripe only or chip and PIn. Hence, $10 prices for US cards vs $25 for the European counterparts. Read more...
@David True. The European cards have both an EMV chip AND a mag stripe. Europeans may generally use the chip for their transactions, but the insecure stripe remains vulnerable to skimming, whether it be from a false front on an ATM or a dishonest waiter with a handheld skimmer. If their stripe is skimmed, the track data can still be cloned and used fraudulently in the United States. If European banks only detect fraud from 9-5 GMT, that might explain why American criminals prefer them over American bank issued cards, who have fraud detection in place 24x7. Read more...

Our apologies. Due to legal and security copyright issues, we can't facilitate the printing of Premium Content. If you absolutely need a hard copy, please contact customer service.