SEO: What's your WooRank?

[tomd]

A few months ago, I was reading one of the photo industry magazines and it discussed search engine ranking and ways to evaluate your site and hence improve it's position on major search engines.
It suggested WooRank as a tool for analyzing your web content.

I thought if we collectively posted our current Woo Rank scores and shared ideas for improving them, we could all learn something.
note: this doesn't have to be limited to photo web sites. I know many POTN'ers are part time photographers and WooRank is an excellent tool to apply on your other business web site.


It only takes about 1 minute to run the tool and no registration or sign up is necessary. In fact, I put in the url of my competitors and got a look at their site set up. (this is all 100% free)

http://www.woorank.com/

For the competitive ones in the bunch: who can achieve the highest Woo Rank? I've seen numbers in the upper 50's!

I'll start: my web site: (zenfolio) www.photosbydad.com

score as is: 36.5

[JoeyBowman]

46.5 www.cherishthemomentphotography.net

49.1 www.joeybowman.net


Still got a lot of red dots next to a lot of the things for either site though.

[tomd]

That's what I've been working on in my free time, getting rid of the red dots. Starting with the ones with the biggest impact.

[kb9tdj]

OK...I'll play:

43.9 www.scottrichardsonphotography.com

[Wilddoc]

46.9 - www.natashajapp.com

[Karlo]

43.7 www.omni-foto.com /dunno if it works with Croatian...

[Stime187]

www.LightOfTheWild.com

Score = 44.2

[cory1848]

www.fixedfocus.us 42.9

www.coryknowlton.com 39.3

Guess I have some work to do...

[Hikin Mike]

I'll play too. I have two sites...

Photography - www.imagesinthebackcountry.com - 48.0

Backpacking - www.thebackcountry.org - 59.8

[tomd]

Nice! 59.8

Mike you are clearly (thus far) the god of SEO.
Do you spend a lot of time on the SEO?

[Hikin Mike]

Nice! 59.8

Mike you are clearly (thus far) the god of SEO.
Do you spend a lot of time on the SEO?

Yes. ;)

My backpacking site has been up since ~1999. I get a lot of traffic because of that. I'v only had my photography site up about a year. I made sure my code is 100% complaint (I hand-code it). I make sure I have a good <title>, <h1>, <h2> tags etc. and content.

[Hikin Mike]

BTW, here's another SEO tool...

http://websitegrader.com/

[TeenPhotog]

47.6 is it partially rating my site partially rating zenfolio, because it tells me this: 80,000 to 300,000 visitors/month

[tracknut]

My photo site at www.pixf.com - 53.1

Oh great, another list of things to do..... :)

Dave

In looking through the report, I see a fair amount of the information is actually wrong. Not sure what the deal is with woorank (never heard of it before this post), but SEO is a wacky enough sport as it is, without plain wrong information...

[HastyPhoto]

More important is pagerank.

www.checkpagerank.net

[DRNPhoto]

I may be the lowest so far. :o

32.0 - www.drnphotography.com

I have been using websitegrader.com and really working on getting a better score. Even more late nights to come........

[Hikin Mike]

My photo site at www.pixf.com (http://www.pixf.com) - 53.1

Oh great, another list of things to do..... :)

Dave

In looking through the report, I see a fair amount of the information is actually wrong. Not sure what the deal is with woorank (never heard of it before this post), but SEO is a wacky enough sport as it is, without plain wrong information...

I'm seeing that too. It tells me I have no feed, but I have a blog with a feed. Also I know for a fact I have more backlinks then that. Its a fun tool to play with regardless.

I'm up to 49.1 on my photography site and 61.3 on my backpacking site. :lol:

[cloose]

http://craigloose.com

40.9

[JS4KIKZ]

I may be the lowest so far. :o

32.0 - www.drnphotography.com (http://www.drnphotography.com)

I have been using websitegrader.com and really working on getting a better score. Even more late nights to come........


Definitely not.

27.6 www.JS4KIKZ.com

I put most of my pics up on my smugmug page. If I had set up a regular website with all of the pictures I have, I hope my ranking would have been higher. Although....the WooRank does show me what I can do to improve my site. :)

[Dave G]

58 not too bad for a blog (link in sig)

[themadman]

46.1 =( WilliamLiuPhotography.com (http://www.williamliuphotography.com)

[tomd]

58 not too bad for a blog (link in sig)

you must be doing something right! Great score :D

[darosk]

48.9
I like how they tell you the ways you can improve, with links and explanations and everything :)

[mikekelley]

50.0 -

www.newgravityimaging.com

AWESOME tool! Thanks for the link.

[Muska]

38.1

i can see a couple of areas I can improve.

[dsd17]

It seems as though they don't like Joomla templates (and probably other CMS). Several of the sites we have for clients are showing lots of information missing, but it is in fact there.

[tomd]

It seems as though they don't like Joomla templates (and probably other CMS). Several of the sites we have for clients are showing lots of information missing, but it is in fact there.

I wonder if WooRank is missing this info, are the spiders also missing it? interesting

[stagi]

Pretty cool site thanks for sharing. Mine is
49.3 http://www.wedclix.com

Looks like I need to work on a few things, lots of red dots. On the good side of things I do rank 1st in google for a lot of the keywords I am after so that makes me feel a little better. Will have to set aside some time this week to look at all of these points though and what I can improve on!

[dsd17]

I wonder if WooRank is missing this info, are the spiders also missing it? interesting

I take that back. It will find SOME titles from Joomla sites, just not all of them. Reran it on 4 sites this morning, 2 said they had titles, 2 said they didn't.

[Hikin Mike]

It seems as though they don't like Joomla templates (and probably other CMS). Several of the sites we have for clients are showing lots of information missing, but it is in fact there.

I mentioned that on the first page. I have a website and a blog (same URL, different folder) and WooRank can't find the feed from my blog. I went ahead and added the metadata tag for it yesterday, just because. I also have a lot more backlinks then WooRank lists.

It's a neat tool to play around with though, I prefer the HubSpot's Website Grader. :cool:

[DRNPhoto]

I may be the lowest so far. :o

32.0 - www.drnphotography.com

I have been using websitegrader.com and really working on getting a better score. Even more late nights to come........

I am now at 35.0

I guess the late nights are paying off...... Now I need to continue to put in even more late nights...... :confused:

[tomd]

DRN, maybe we should have a prize for the largest point gain on WooRank?

I enjoy the time spent tweaking my site to find ways to increase my search engine placement.

[snails]

46.6 upgraded to 50.2 after a few small edits.

(with the traffic assistance of SmugMug)

[primoz]

58.3 for our web (http://www.photo.si), but to be honest, I don't think this is very important thing to know.

[DRNPhoto]

DRN, maybe we should have a prize for the largest point gain on WooRank?

I enjoy the time spent tweaking my site to find ways to increase my search engine placement.

I agree that it's fun trying to tweak the site! Now what kind of prize would be fitting?:smile:

[DRNPhoto]

I am now at 35.0

I guess the late nights are paying off...... Now I need to continue to put in even more late nights...... :confused:

38.7 and chipping away. My site is flash based so I am sure that I will hit a ceiling. I wonder if I need to also setup an HTML site option from my main site that is iPAD/iPhone friendly and it would also give me a bigger boast in searches compared to flash.....

[jhuckelberry]

38.3 http://www.huckelberryphoto.com

just went live a day or so ago. Interesting report, some things to take a look at.

[robgr85]

41.1 - http://robertgrubba.com

Thanks for the link, I'll try to constantly improve my website!