Link building
Link gap
In the brief I clarify what we are comparing in the link gap analysis and in what form I will deliver the result. We establish the market/language, the categories or URLs to strengthen, the list of competitors and the level of analysis (domain, section, URL). I collect the input data, exclusions and legal/PR constraints in order to map link opportunities to priorities.
About the service
Brief and scope of the link gap analysis: competitors, URLs and output format
About the link gap analysis service
A few service details- Establishing the market and language
- Selecting competitors to compare
- Defining the level of analysis
- List of priority URLs
- Collecting legal/PR constraints
- Output format: report, list, plan
Work process
The cooperation process for a link gap analysis and link building plan
I start by comparing your link profile with the competition and identifying the sources that pass your site by. We then establish the filters, criteria and exclusions, and I map the opportunities to URLs and topics. From there we work iteratively within the scope we agree on together.
- 01/ 03
Link gap analysis
I compare referring domains, page types and link context to identify competitors’ advantages, recurring patterns and sources to reject or verify further
- 02/ 03
Priorities and mapping
I assess quality and risk, we establish the prioritisation criteria, and I then assign the opportunities to specific URLs and topics and point out the content gaps that make it harder to earn links.
- 03/ 03
Implementation and iterations
I hand over the link gap report and the list of opportunities and, if we extend the scope, I prepare outreach materials and coordinate link acquisition, updating the priorities as the data changes.
Brief and scope of the link gap analysis
The brief and scoping of the link gap analysis mean clarifying what exactly we are comparing and in what form I deliver the result. At this stage we establish the market/language, the main categories or URLs to strengthen and the list of competitors to compare. We also clarify the expected output format: a report, an acquisition list or an action plan. These decisions determine how links are mapped to priorities and the direction of further work.
As part of the brief we make decisions on the choice of competitors and the level of analysis: domain, section or a specific URL. The choice of domains competing for similar keywords/topics (direct and/or content competitors) and the number of entities compared affect the breadth of the comparison and the list of potential link sources. Establishing the level of analysis defines whether the comparison concerns the whole domain, selected sections (e.g. categories) or landing pages. This makes it possible to assign link building opportunities to the right areas of the site later on.
Key input data from the client
The key input data from the client is the information that makes it possible to collect the link profiles and set the priorities of the analysis correctly. I need the site’s URLs and an indication of the priority categories or products to be strengthened. If you have a list of known competitors, it is worth passing it on at the very start, because it streamlines the choice of domains to compare. Information about legal or PR constraints related to acquiring links is important too.
Equally important is an indication of the content that cannot be promoted, because this affects the later filters and prioritisation criteria. This input data helps to define which opportunities can realistically be mapped to specific sections/URLs of the site and which exclusions should apply.
On that basis I match the structure of the result to the agreed form: a report, an acquisition list or an action plan.
- The site’s URLs
- Priority categories/products
- A list of known competitors (if there is one)
- Information about legal/PR constraints on link acquisition
- An indication of content that cannot be promoted (if applicable)
Selecting and comparing competitors
Selecting and comparing competitors means choosing the domains that genuinely compete for similar keywords or topics, so that the comparison of link profiles has operational value. In practice I put together direct and/or content competitors, to capture both the competition for the same queries and for topical coverage. We also establish the number of domains compared, because it affects the breadth of the analysis and how extensive the list of potential link sources will be. On that basis I prepare the material for the gap identification stage, i.e. pointing out the link sources that competitors have and the analysed site does not.
The comparison also takes into account the agreed level of analysis: domain, section or a specific URL, which determines how the data is set out in the results. This makes it possible to check not only the competitors’ advantage at the level of the whole domain, but also the differences within specific types of landing pages and topics. During the comparison I take into account topical coverage and the types of pages the links lead to, so that later recommendations can be assigned to specific areas of the site. The final choice of competitors is therefore a decision that directly affects the range of opportunities identified and the priorities in the action plan.
- Choosing domains that compete for similar keywords/topics (direct and/or content competitors)
- Establishing the number of entities compared
- Defining the level of comparison: domain / section / URL
Collecting and normalising link profiles
Collecting and normalising link profiles means obtaining and compiling the inbound link data for the site and the selected competitors in a consistent format for comparison. At this stage I gather information about referring domains, source and target URLs, anchors and link types. The data is compiled so that it is later possible to indicate which sources link to the competition and do not link to the analysed site. The amount of work in this part depends, among other things, on the number of competitors, the size of the site and the number of sections/URLs included in the comparison.
Data normalisation means preparing the collected information so that it is suitable for reliable comparison and filtering. I remove duplicates, standardise domains and subdomains, and merge URL variants (e.g. with parameters) so as not to distort the conclusions. I also filter out obvious artefacts and organise the structure of the dataset for the later quality assessment and prioritisation. Only on data prepared in this way can the gap identification and the mapping of opportunities to specific landing pages be carried out reliably.
- Data compiled: referring domains, source URLs, target URLs, anchors, link types
- Cleaning: removing duplicates and filtering out obvious artefacts
- Standardisation: domains/subdomains and merging of URL variants (e.g. parameters)
- Preparing the dataset for comparison and further quality verification
Comparison and identification of the link gap
Comparison and identification of the link gap means pointing out the sources that link to competitors and do not link to the analysed site. In this part I set out topical coverage and the types of landing pages, to see where competitors have an advantage and how they distribute links between sections. The analysis also takes into account how often sources recur, which helps to distinguish one-off cases from recurring patterns in the link profile. The result of the comparison is the basis for the later prioritisation and mapping of opportunities to specific areas of the site.
As part of the gap identification I analyse both the parameters of the links themselves and the context and types of the linking pages, and then assess the quality and risk of the sources. This covers verifying credibility and topical relevance, and marking low-quality signals (e.g. mass directories, content farms) as items to reject or verify further. On that basis we establish the filters and prioritisation criteria (topical relevance, traffic potential, page type, feasibility of acquisition, risk) and the industry/PR exclusions. I then map the opportunities to specific URLs and topics and point out the content gaps that make it harder to earn links (e.g. a lack of reference materials).
- Referring domains and the source and target pages
- Anchors and link context (editorial/navigational)
- Type of linking page (e.g. article, directory)
- Distribution of links across site sections and recurrence of sources
- Assessment of source quality and risk, and flags for rejection or further verification
Recommendations and a link building action plan
The recommendations and link building action plan translate the identified gap into priorities and specific directions for acquiring links. In this part I prepare a list of priority link building targets matched to the site’s sections/URLs, so that the work is consistent with the agreed priorities. The recommendations also include content and technical advice that makes it easier to earn links, including the choice of landing pages and the refinement of the assets intended for promotion. The scope of the advice follows from the previously agreed filters, criteria and industry/PR exclusions.
The result of this stage is a Link Gap Report and a List of link acquisition opportunities, and optionally also an implementation backlog on the site’s side. The Link Gap Report summarises where competitors have an advantage, which types of sources dominate and which sections are under-linked, and it also contains conclusions and priorities. The List of link acquisition opportunities covers the domains/URLs for potential contact, marked with priority, risk, topical relevance and the suggested landing page on the site. We agree on the scope of implementation separately: I can finish the work at the analysis and recommendations, or extend it to preparing materials for outreach and coordinating link acquisition, which affects the division of responsibility.
- Link Gap Report: competitors’ advantages, dominant source types, under-linked sections, conclusions and priorities
- List of link acquisition opportunities: domains/URLs, priority, risk, topical relevance, suggested landing page
- Implementation backlog (optional): tasks on the content/site structure side that increase the chances of earning links
Testimonials
What clients and the industry say
Feedback from clients and industry people I have worked with on SEO projects.
I had the chance to work with Kuba at Kulturalnie o SEO, an event I organise. Kuba did a great job as a speaker and received high marks from the audience. He showed professionalism and broad knowledge. In other projects at Vestigio, Kuba shows enormous commitment, a willingness to explore and implement new ideas, and excellent organisation of his work.
01 / 08
You talk to me, not a salesperson
Tell me what you want to achieve. I’ll reply personally
I work as a freelancer: the same person reads your message, prepares the quote and then runs the project. No sales team in between.