SurfSense/.cursor/skills/backlink-analyzer/references/link-quality-rubric.md

Link Quality Rubric

Comprehensive reference for evaluating backlink quality. Use this rubric to assess individual links, audit entire link profiles, perform competitive link gap analysis, and prepare disavow files.

---

1. Individual Link Quality Evaluation

Scoring Methodology

Evaluate each link across six factors. Multiply score (1-5) by factor weight to produce a weighted score. Sum all weighted scores for a final Link Quality Score (LQS).

Rating Scale:

• LQS 4.0-5.0: Premium link — high authority, topically relevant, editorial placement
• LQS 2.5-3.9: Acceptable link — provides value, typical of healthy profiles
• LQS 1.0-2.4: Low quality — minimal value, review for potential risk

Factor 1: Domain Authority (25% weight)

Score	DR / DA Range	Characteristics	Examples
5	DR 70+	Major publication, established authority	NYTimes, Forbes, BBC, major university sites
4	DR 50-69	Strong domain, recognized in industry	Industry publications, large blogs, government sites
3	DR 30-49	Moderate authority, established site	Mid-tier blogs, regional publications, niche authorities
2	DR 15-29	Low authority, newer or smaller site	Small blogs, newer companies, personal sites
1	DR <15	Very low authority	New sites, abandoned sites, thin content sites

Notes:

• DR/DA is a proxy, not the sole indicator. A DR 30 site that is highly relevant to your niche may be more valuable than a DR 70 site in an unrelated field.
• Check if the domain's authority is organic (earned over time) or inflated (bought links, PBN).

Factor 2: Topical Relevance (25% weight)

Score	Relevance Level	Description
5	Exact match	Same niche, same subtopic. A link from a CRM review site to your CRM product.
4	Closely related	Same industry, adjacent topic. A marketing blog linking to your email tool.
3	Broadly related	Same general field. A business blog linking to your SaaS product.
2	Tangentially related	Loose connection. A general news site mentioning your product in a tech roundup.
1	Unrelated	No topical connection. A cooking blog linking to your B2B software.

How to assess relevance:

1. Read the linking page content. Is it about your topic?
2. Check the linking site's overall focus. Is it in your industry?
3. Look at the surrounding content. Does the link make editorial sense?
4. Check the site's other outbound links. Are they topically coherent?

Factor 3: Traffic to Linking Page (15% weight)

Score	Estimated Monthly Traffic	Characteristics
5	10,000+ visits/month	High-traffic page, likely drives referral traffic
4	1,000-9,999 visits/month	Solid traffic, some referral value
3	100-999 visits/month	Moderate traffic, primarily SEO value
2	10-99 visits/month	Low traffic, SEO value only
1	<10 visits/month	No meaningful traffic, minimal value

Why traffic matters:

• Links from pages with real traffic are more likely to be genuine editorial placements.
• Google likely weights links from pages that receive traffic more highly.
• Referral traffic from the link provides direct business value beyond SEO.

Factor 4: Link Position (15% weight)

Score	Position	Description
5	In-content, editorial	Naturally placed within the article body as a citation or resource
4	In-content, contextual	Within the body text but in a "resources" or "further reading" section
3	Author bio or about section	Part of a contributor's bio or about page
2	Sidebar or dedicated links section	Widget, blogroll, or sidebar placement
1	Footer, sitewide, or hidden	Footer link, sitewide template link, or visually obscured

Key principle: Editorial in-content links carry the most weight because they represent a genuine endorsement. Footer and sitewide links are devalued by search engines.

Factor 5: Anchor Text (10% weight)

Score	Anchor Type	Example (for a CRM product)
5	Descriptive, natural	"this customer relationship management platform"
4	Partial match, natural	"CRM tools for small businesses"
3	Brand name	"Acme CRM"
2	Naked URL	"https://acmecrm.com"
1	Generic	"click here", "read more", "this website"

Important nuance: A natural link profile has a MIX of all anchor types. Too many exact-match anchors (score 5) can signal manipulation. The ideal distribution is:

• Brand anchors: 30-40%
• Naked URLs: 15-25%
• Generic anchors: 10-20%
• Descriptive/partial match: 15-25%
• Exact match: 5-15%

Factor 6: Follow Status (10% weight)

Score	Status	Description
5	Dofollow, editorial	Standard followed link from editorial content
4	Dofollow, non-editorial	Followed link from directory, profile, or user-generated content
3	Sponsored (rel="sponsored")	Properly disclosed sponsored/paid link
2	UGC (rel="ugc")	User-generated content link (forums, comments)
1	Nofollow (rel="nofollow")	Explicitly nofollowed link

Notes:

• Google treats nofollow as a "hint" rather than a directive since 2019.
• Nofollow links from high-authority sites (e.g., Wikipedia) still provide brand value and referral traffic.
• A healthy profile naturally includes a mix of followed and nofollowed links. Typical ratio: 60-80% dofollow, 20-40% nofollow.

---

2. Example Link Profile Assessments

Example A: Strong Link Profile

Characteristic	Value	Assessment
Total referring domains	1,200	Healthy for a mid-size SaaS company
Dofollow ratio	72%	Natural distribution
Average linking domain DR	38	Solid average authority
Top anchor: brand name	35%	Natural brand dominance
Exact match anchors	8%	Within safe range
Topical relevance (sampled)	75% related	Strong relevance signal
Link velocity	+25/month net	Steady organic growth
Toxic link estimate	3%	Below 5% threshold — healthy

Verdict: Healthy profile with natural link distribution. Continue current strategy.

Example B: At-Risk Link Profile

Characteristic	Value	Assessment
Total referring domains	800	Adequate but thin for competitive niche
Dofollow ratio	92%	Suspiciously high — may indicate link manipulation
Average linking domain DR	18	Low average authority
Top anchor: exact match keyword	42%	Over-optimized — risk of penalty
Exact match anchors	42%	Far above safe threshold (>15%)
Topical relevance (sampled)	30% related	Many irrelevant links
Link velocity	+80/month net	Unnaturally high — investigate
Toxic link estimate	18%	Above 10% threshold — action needed

Verdict: Profile shows signs of manipulation. Immediate actions needed: disavow toxic links, diversify anchor text, slow down link acquisition pace.

Example C: New Site Link Profile

Characteristic	Value	Assessment
Total referring domains	45	Expected for a 6-month-old site
Dofollow ratio	65%	Natural
Average linking domain DR	28	Reasonable for early-stage outreach
Top anchor: brand name	40%	Healthy
Exact match anchors	5%	Conservative and safe
Topical relevance (sampled)	80% related	Well-targeted outreach
Link velocity	+8/month net	Appropriate for new site
Toxic link estimate	1%	Clean profile

Verdict: Healthy foundation. Focus on scaling link acquisition while maintaining quality standards.

---

3. Competitive Link Gap Analysis Methodology

Step-by-Step Process

Step 1: Identify competitors Select 3-5 direct competitors who rank for your target keywords.

Step 2: Pull referring domain data Export the full referring domain list for each competitor from ~~link database.

Step 3: Create intersection matrix

Referring Domain	You	Comp 1	Comp 2	Comp 3	Overlap Count
example-a.com	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	3
example-b.com	No	Yes	Yes	No	2
example-c.com	No	Yes	No	No	1
example-d.com	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	3 (already have)

Step 4: Prioritize opportunities

Priority	Criteria	Rationale
Highest	Links to 3+ competitors, DR 50+, relevant	If all competitors have it, it is likely linkable
High	Links to 2+ competitors, DR 30+, relevant	Strong signal of willingness to link in niche
Medium	Links to 1 competitor, DR 50+, relevant	May be less accessible but high value
Lower	Links to 1 competitor, DR <30, or low relevance	Diminishing returns

Step 5: Analyze link context For each high-priority opportunity, visit the actual linking page to understand:

• Why did they link to your competitor? (resource page, mention, guest post, etc.)
• What content on your site could replace or complement that link?
• What outreach angle would work? (broken link, better resource, relationship)

Step 6: Create outreach plan Build a prioritized list with contact information, outreach angle, and template selection.

---

4. Disavow File Format Guide

When to Disavow

Only disavow links when you have clear evidence of risk. Unnecessary disavow can hurt your rankings.

Situation	Disavow?	Reasoning
Obvious PBN links	Yes	Clear manipulation signal
Paid links you cannot get removed	Yes	After attempting removal
Spam attack (negative SEO)	Yes	Protect from third-party manipulation
Low-quality directory links	Maybe	Only if pattern is excessive
Foreign language spam	Yes	If clearly unnatural
Low-DA sites with real content	No	Low quality is not toxic
Nofollow links from any source	No	Already nofollowed; no risk

Disavow File Format

The disavow file is a plain text file (.txt) uploaded to Google Search Console.

# Disavow file for example.com
# Generated: [date]
# Reason: Toxic link cleanup

# Individual URLs to disavow
https://spam-site.com/page-with-link
https://another-spam.com/toxic-page

# Entire domains to disavow (use for sites with multiple toxic links)
domain:link-farm-example.com
domain:pbn-network-site.com
domain:spam-directory.net

Disavow File Best Practices

Practice	Why
Comment every entry or group	Future auditors need to understand why
Use domain: for sites with multiple bad links	More thorough than individual URLs
Use individual URLs when only one page is toxic	Avoid disavowing good links from the same domain
Keep a changelog	Track what was added and when
Review quarterly	Remove entries if domains have been cleaned up
Never disavow your own domain	Common mistake that causes severe damage
Back up before uploading	Keep previous version in case of errors

Disavow Review Workflow

Step	Action	Tool
1	Export full backlink profile	~~link database
2	Filter for known toxic patterns	Spam score, DR <10, foreign spam
3	Manual review of flagged links	Visit each flagged domain
4	Attempt removal via email first	Contact webmasters
5	Wait 2 weeks for removal responses	Track outreach results
6	Add non-removed toxic links to disavow	Format as .txt file
7	Upload to Google Search Console	Disavow Links tool
8	Document all actions and dates	Internal records
9	Re-check in 4-6 weeks	Verify processing

---

5. Link Profile Health Benchmarks

Healthy Profile Indicators

Metric	Healthy Range	Warning Sign	Critical
Dofollow ratio	60-80%	>90%	>95%
Exact match anchor %	<15%	15-25%	>25%
Brand anchor %	25-45%	<15%	<5%
Toxic link %	<5%	5-10%	>10%
Referring domain growth	Positive, steady	Flat	Declining
Average linking DR	25+	15-25	<15
Link diversity (unique domains / total links)	>0.3	0.1-0.3	<0.1
Topical relevance (sampled)	>60%	40-60%	<40%

Industry-Specific Benchmarks

Authority expectations vary significantly by industry vertical.

Industry	Typical DR Range (Top 10 Sites)	Typical Referring Domains	Link Difficulty
Finance / Insurance	DR 60-90	5,000-50,000+	Very High
Health / Medical	DR 50-85	3,000-30,000+	Very High
Technology / SaaS	DR 40-80	1,000-20,000+	High
E-commerce (general)	DR 35-75	500-15,000+	High
Legal	DR 40-70	1,000-10,000+	High
Education	DR 50-90	2,000-25,000+	Medium-High
Local services	DR 15-45	50-500	Medium
B2B niche	DR 25-60	200-5,000+	Medium
Blog / Content site	DR 20-70	100-10,000+	Medium
New startup	DR 5-25	10-200	Starting point

Note: These are general ranges. Actual requirements depend on your specific keyword competition.