The Problem with Alexa Rating

Please Share

Internet marketers always want to know how well that their internet site is performing when compared to their competitor's web sites. The problem is that it's impossible to really access the backend details of their competitors to find out how traffic that a web site is getting. You can see how good that they are ranking in the search engines, but you do not know how traffic that they are getting. One guide that many internet marketers use is the traffic rankings given by Alexa. They use information compiled from users that have their toolbar set up in the web browser and record data on the websites which they go to. Based on this information they provide a ranking of all the web sites based on the traffic. A major trouble with the ratings is that they are biased towards the sorts of websites that those who are more computer knowledgeable are inclined to visit, as it is only these types of people who tend to set up the toolbar. Those who are less technological savvy, usually do not set up the toolbar and in all likelihood tend to go to different types of websites.

The problem with the Alexa Rankings rating is that it is really easy to fake that you really do not know if what you see is genuine or if it has been managed by your competitor to look greater than it really is. All you need to do to unnaturally inflate the Alexa rating is install the toolbar on your computer and simply go to your web site many times each day and then watch as the Alexa ranking improves. Even better, get a few colleagues to do it also. There are even paid services that can do that for you to unnaturally improve the rating. This is the reason the Alexa ranking number is possibly not worth spending much time on as it is so easy to manipulate.

The final word on the Alexa ranking is that it is just that, a ranking of websites based upon traffic that is easily manipulated. No internet search engine makes use of the Alexa number to rank sites, so there is no advantage to having a good Alexa rating.


Leave a Reply