HUGE UPDATE! I ran 1 million domains through Ahrefs, SEMRush, Moz, Majestic & SEO Spyglass to find out who really is the best backlink checker.
Back in 2013, I conducted an experiment to see which is the best link checker.
Long story short, Ahrefs won…
This really upset the Majestic team at the time and sparked a lot of controversy, but they did make some valid points-
And they were right!
So then re-conducted the experiment on an altogether BIGGER scale (1 million domains vs. the original 3). Ahrefs won again.
Now it’s many years later.
So I thought it would make sense to re-run the numbers this year for all 1 million domains AND compare the functionality of the tools.
But…
I’m also going to reveal how Majestic essential cheat on backlink counts (you won’t believe this one!)
What Will I Learn?
Before we get to the experiment, let me talk about my data source.
For those that don’t know, the Majestic team publish what is called the Majestic Million.
The Majestic Million is a list of the top 1 million website in the world, based on the number of referring IP’s found for that domain in their Fresh index.
So with this, Majestic SEO are outright telling us these are the sites they know the most about in terms of backlinks.
You can download a copy for yourself free of charge and it will tell you the total number of linking subnets (RefSubNets) and the total number of linking IPs (RefIPs) for each domain in the top million.
To compare Majestic SEO with Ahrefs, I’m going to look up the total number of linking subnets and IP’s for all of the domains in the Majestic Million.
To give you an example with this blog-
So in that specific instance, Majestic wins the test.
But:
Now imagine doing the same – but for 1 million sites.
That is the test I have done based on what Majestic say are the top 1 million sites in the world in terms of links.
This is what the CSV data looks like in its raw form-
And you can download a copy of the data that is used in this test.
Before I get to the results, I need to mention that both Majestic and Ahrefs maintain multiple indexes.
Majestic have two indexes: Fresh and Historic indexes.
Ahrefs have three: Live, Recent, and Historical.
You can learn more about these indexes here.
But for the sake of this article, I’ll be comparing the following indexes:
Let’s start with a comparison of the Fresh vs. Recent index.
With such a huge amount of data, I decided to split the results into 10 groups of 100,000 URLs (by Majestic GlobalRank) and then compare those groups.
This is what the group numbers look like (refer to by_groups.csv in the data pack)–
GlobalRank | Ahrefs Wins (IP) | Majestic Wins (IP) | Ahrefs Wins (Subnet) | Majestic Wins (Subnet) |
---|---|---|---|---|
1-100,000 | 85,228 | 14,762 | 86,095 | 13,896 |
100,001-200,000 | 69,953 | 30,029 | 72,114 | 27,860 |
200,001-300,000 | 74,074 | 25,902 | 77,035 | 22,928 |
300,001-400,000 | 78,264 | 21,709 | 82,075 | 17,904 |
400,001-500,000 | 74,708 | 25,264 | 79,389 | 20,582 |
500,001-600,000 | 66,252 | 33,710 | 71,124 | 28,846 |
600,001-700,000 | 75,530 | 24,427 | 81,426 | 18,512 |
700,001-800,000 | 76,733 | 23,221 | 81,346 | 18,583 |
800,001-900,000 | 79,243 | 20,705 | 85,624 | 14,279 |
900,001-1,000,000 | 79,261 | 20,687 | 85,696 | 14,187 |
Just looks like a bunch of meaningless numbers right?
What about now-
Pretty brutal to look at if you are a current Majestic SEO customer right?
Now might be the right time to switch to Ahrefs.
But before you do let’s look at the totals-
It’s worth noting that Ahrefs has actually pulled even further ahead of Majestic (by ~7% for IP wins, and ~11% for subnet wins) since 2013. Which is when I first ran this experiment.
So those are the results of the Majestic Fresh vs. Ahrefs Recent index comparison, but what about Majestic’s Historic vs. Ahrefs’ Historical?
This test is particulary interesting because-
Well:
It presents an altogether different story.
GlobalRank | Ahrefs Wins (IP) | Majestic Wins (IP) | Ahrefs Wins (Subnet) | Majestic Wins (Subnet) |
---|---|---|---|---|
1-100,000 | 15,424 | 84,555 | 14,789 | 85,187 |
100,001-200,000 | 20,320 | 79,606 | 19,873 | 80,047 |
200,001-300,000 | 18,081 | 81,855 | 17,613 | 82,309 |
300,001-400,000 | 13,645 | 86,317 | 13,177 | 86,770 |
400,001-500,000 | 11,990 | 87,976 | 11,675 | 88,275 |
500,001-600,000 | 9,186 | 90,778 | 8,973 | 90,976 |
600,001-700,000 | 11,219 | 88,674 | 11,003 | 88,870 |
700,001-800,000 | 11,167 | 88,627 | 9,120 | 90,819 |
800,001-900,000 | 10,515 | 89,433 | 9,857 | 90,036 |
900,001-1,000,000 | 10,796 | 89,139 | 10,346 | 89,580 |
I think the results become super clear when displayed in graph format:
Based on this data, Majestic absolutely crush Ahrefs when it comes to the historical index test.
This is even more apparent if we look at the totals-
So, Majestic clearly wins the historic index comparison.
But what does this really mean?
Well, historic indexes serve as records of the backlinks that have existed in their respective tools index at some point in the past, but aren’t live today.
When you take this into account, it comes as no surprise that Majestic won this test.
They’ve been saving (probably) links to their Historic index since they launched in 2009.
Ahrefs, on the other hand, has only been saving dead links to their Historical index since 2015, so Majestic has a 6 year head start here!
Bottomline: Majestic has a larger index of dead links than Ahrefs.
That’s all I’m going to say about that one.
I’ll let you decide which index is more important to you.
My methodology for this experiment is far from perfect.
So I thought I’d briefly explain what I see as some potential flaws with this data.
The graphs above show the number of “wins” rather than absolute numbers.
Because of this, the difference between the bars on the graphs is not really indicative of index size.
I’ll try to illustrate what I mean with an example:
Let’s say we have two sites:
(Yes, it’s an extreme example, but bare with me!)
Ahrefs “wins” for both of these sites, but it’s clear that there’s a much larger difference between reported numbers from each tool for Site B.
With Site A, Ahrefs only wins because they report one extra Ref.IP.
This means that the “number of wins” doesn’t give any insight into how much bigger one database is than the other.
So what does “number of wins” tell us?
It tells us that Ahrefs finds more links for any given website than Majestic, and that it’s rare for Majestic to show links than Ahrefs (links = IPs/Subnets).
FYI, if you’re wondering why I chose to compare IPs/Subnets over links, check out this article co-authored by Dixon Jones from Majestic.
It’s important to remember that we’re dealing with two totally different indexes here.
Which means that some links that Majestic reports may not exist in Ahrefs’ Index, and vice-versa.
Once again, let me offer an example.
This time we only need one hypothetical site, for which we’ll assume that both Ahrefs and Majestic report the same number of links: 3.
Here are the three hypothetical links reported by each tool:
Ahrefs | Majestic |
---|---|
domain.com/webpage | domain.com/webpage |
domain.com/webpage2 | domain.com/webpage2 |
anotherdomain.com/webpage | someotherdomain.com/blog |
Do you see my point?
Just because we have the same number of reported links from each tool doesn’t necessarily mean that they’re the same links.
You can see in our hypothetical example that only two of the links are common to both indexes.
This brings me on to an important point:
If you desperately need a full picture of your link profile, you’ll have to pay for both tools and cross-reference data.
BUT!
And this is a BIG BUT!
Even if you do that you need to understand that Majestic’s backlink stats are almost always inflated.
Why?
Because of the absolutely absurd way Majestic count and report backlinks.
I am going to talk about that more in the next section, but seriously – make sure you are sitting down for this one because I am going to show you how Majestic essentially cheats on backlink counts.
Now we’ve talked about backlink data and whatnot, I want to make an important point:
Majestic and Ahrefs are VERY different tools.
Majestic is essentially one tool: a backlink checker.
But Ahrefs is a suite of tools. Alongside Site Explorer (for checking backlink data), they also have:
Another big differentiator is the addition of “Competitive intelligence” in Ahrefs, which is basically search traffic data.
In other words, you can see how much traffic any domain or website receives from Google, and the keywords it ranks for.
See my full Ahrefs review and my Ahrefsbot blog post.
But let’s get back to backlink data for a moment…
It’s important to realise that index size means nothing unless you’re able to extract actionable data and insights from it.
Both Majestic and Ahrefs do have an API for doing this at scale (this is what I used for this study), but most of us don’t pay for access to that.
So, let’s quickly compare the on-site backlink research features that exist in Ahrefs and Majestic.
Let’s start by plugging this same URL (the beginners guide to SEO from Moz) into both tools to see what kind of insights we can get from them.
NOTE. I’m using the “exact URL” setting, because I only want to analyze backlinks pointing directly at that URL.
A few comparable metrics right off the bat:
So Majestic reports more backlinks in total, but Ahrefs reports (a lot) more referring domains.
That’s a win for Majestic, right?
Not so fast.
(This is something I really feel the need to highlight!)
Majestic’s backlink stats are almost always inflated because of the absolutely absurd way they report backlinks.
Let me illustrate by going to the Referring Domains tab in Majestic.
Majestic is reporting 370K+ backlinks from just one referring domain.
That accounts for nearly 60% of all reported backlinks!
Let’s see how many backlinks Ahrefs reports from this domain-
Just 4!
So why does Majestic report 373,004 backlinks from that domain while Ahrefs only reports 4?
This happens because Majestic fail to strip URL parameters from URLs, which results in the same backlink being duplicated hundreds, sometimes even thousands of times.
This also happens when you export the data from Majestic.
Take a look at this backlink export from my blog and you’ll see that digitalphillipines.net is linking to me nearly 700,000 times-
But when we export the data and look at the links, you’ll see they are mostly duplicate links with different UTM parameters on the end-
For example Majestic counts the below as 4 separate backlinks-
But the reality is they are just one backlink – but Majestic is reporting them as 4.
In my opinion, this is total madness.
Especially when the vast majority of the 700,000 links coming from digitalphillipines.net are duplicates.
Ahref’s on the other hand, only counts 17 links-
Why?
Because Ahrefs understands that those additional URL parameters do not make them all unique links so filter them out accordingly.
If you go from the Summary page in Majestic to their Ref.Domains and Backlinks reports, you’ll notice that the total numbers of ref.domains and backlinks that you just saw on that “Summary” page now completely disappear.
That’s because these reports are limited to 30k rows of data – 600 pages, 50 results per page.
This makes every report in Majestic somewhat useless because you can only see a sample of the data!
Sure you can view the first 30,000 rows – but after that, they cut you off.
That is a huge limitation and I feel like it really goes against the grain of Majestic’s core mission.
What’s the point of building a huge database of links if you are going to limit access to it?
It’s the same when you try to export this data too – it defaults to a max of 30K rows.
However you can export more than 30k rows if you request an “advanced report” by clicking the tiny link highlighted in the screenshot below:
But even when you click this, you’re taken to quite a puzzling page where you seemingly have to tick a bunch of boxes in order to do what you want to do.
So bottomline-
In comparison, Ahrefs shows full data in both their Ref.Domains and Backlinks reports.
And exporting FULL DATA is super easy – just hit the “export” button.
Much nicer!
However, one downside of this is that reports sometimes load slower in Ahrefs than Majestic, especially when analysing big sites.
This is because Ahrefs has to work to pull all data, whereas Majestic just has to show a cached sample of 30K pages/ref.domains.
To be honest:
Any further comparison here makes no sense because Majestic’s on-site tools only works with a sample of data whereas Ahrefs lets you work with FULL data.
However, I do want to compare and highlight a few things in these reports.
But first, I want to talk a bit about indexes.
So you may have noticed that Majestic has two different indexes for you to choose from, while Ahrefs has three.
You may have noticed in the screenshots above that Majestic defaults to their Fresh index, whereas Ahrefs defaults to their Live index.
Let me try to explain the deal with all of these indexes.
So Ahrefs Live index is updated every 15 minutes, and I know they put a lot of effort into re-crawling all links in their Live index pretty regularly.
But as Ahrefs recrawls links, they naturally come across some that are no longer there.
Like, sometimes the page will still be live, but the link will be gone. Or maybe the actual linking page can no longer be found.
In this case, Ahrefs removes the link from their Live index, but it remains in their Recent index, where this backlink stays for 90 more days. Quite often the pages disappear because of server downtime, so when Ahrefs next re-crawls the page, they may see that the link is still there.
If this happens, it gets moved back to the Live index.
If Ahrefs don’t see the link going live again within 90 days of it being moved to the Recent Index, it gets moved to the Historical index. This is basically a graveyard for all backlinks that they’ve once seen as live, but the subsequent recrawls confirmed their death.
To summarise (for Ahrefs):
Unlike Ahrefs, they don’t maintain a Live index. They only have their Fresh index, which is kind of the same as Ahrefs’ Recent index as it contains all links that were seen live in the last 90 days, regardless of their status at the present moment.
They also have their Historic Index, which is comparable to Ahrefs Historical index. However, it is vastly bigger than Ahrefs’ Historic index because they started saving deleted links years before Ahrefs did.
To summarise (for Majestic):
Having used both tools on and off for a good few years, I know that Ahrefs only started adding links to their Historic index around mid-2015, whereas I’d say Majestic has been doing that for at least 5 years.
That’s exactly why Majestic’s is bigger right now.
Either way, these tools historic indexes are essentially graveyard of links, so most of the links in both Majestic and Ahrefs Historic indexes are no longer live.
But anyway, now we’ve tackled the technicalities, I can move on to some features.
Before I do that, I want to stress something:
I much prefer Ahrefs over Majestic.
So most of the stuff I discuss below will be reasons why that is the case.
But let’s start with a brief comparison of the summary/overview reports in Ahrefs and Majestic.
To start, I’ll highlight a couple of super useful graphs that I absolutely love on the Overview tab in Ahrefs Site Explorer: Referring Domains and Organic Traffic.
These show how the number of referring domains and amount of organic traffic has changed to a site (or URL) over time.
Here’s the referring domains graph:
Here’s the organic search traffic one:
Unfortunately, Majestic have no such graph for backlink data, and they don’t have any data on search traffic at all.
They do show you two graphs that they call “URL backlink history” and “Referring domains” – but these are entirely different.
In Majestic’s own words, these charts show “the number of Referring Domains [or backlinks] reviewed every day.”
So this graph mostly refers to how fast Majestic crawls the web, rather than showing how fast your target acquired backlinks.
As a result, these graphs don’t tell you anything about how a target’s backlink profile has changed over time, so I don’t really understand why they’re useful.
If anyone does happen to have a good use case, feel free to let me know in the comments!
And it’s also an image, it’s not an interactive graph. So I can’t hover my mouse over a specific date and get the precise number, like I can in Ahrefs.
As for the other numbers that you can see in Ahrefs “Overview” report and in Majestic “Summary” report, they’re more or less comparable.
Pretty standard stuff, no striking differences there.
I’d say the only major difference is the fact that each tool shows their proprietary metrics.
In Majestic’s case, these are TF/CF.
And in Ahrefs these are UR/DR.
Comparing them is a different story, so I’m not even going to attempt that but I do use both sets of metrics to evaluate expired domains/aged doamins.
Let’s move on to the referring domains reports.
Majestic has quite a few data points in their Ref.domains report, so they had to introduce a few different views.
Here’s the one they default to: Links.
For me, the most useful data points here are:
I think it’s really cool how they include the number of ref.domains and backlinks to each ref.domain – that’s something Ahrefs doesn’t do.
I also like their Geo report.
This shows things like the domain language(s), TLD, IP, IP location (cool!), TF/CF.
In fact, a lot of these reports are quite cool – I recommend playing around with them.
But what about filtering and sorting options?
Unfortunately, these don’t really exist (I guess their different reports kind of count of filters?) but they do have “Order by” and “Then” sorting options, which are quite confusing.
I think the biggest letdown here is that many of these reports end up being kind of pointless, simply due to the fact that Majestic only lets you work with sample data.
Sure, you have 30K rows to play with, which admittedly is plenty for most sites. But for some sites it just doesn’t cut it.
Here’s another thing:
Although Majestic have a column with a number showing the number backlinks, they don’t differentiate between dofollow and nofollow links.
This means it’s only possible to sort by the number of backlinks from a ref.domain – you can’t sort by the referring domains with the most dofollow backlinks, for example.
Ahrefs, on the other hand, absolutely shines when it comes to filtering and sorting.
For a start, there’s a column highlighting dofollow/nofollow links, and it’s easy to sort a list of referring domains by that metric.
And once again, Ahrefs will sort the entire list of ref.domains – not just a sample of the data like in Majestic.
Here’s another notable feature Ahrefs has in this report:
You can easily filter referring domains by the backlink type, and can instantly see how many referring domains of each type there is.
So if you want to export dofollow ref.domains only, simply filter and click export. Easy as that.
Back to Majestic, it looks like the domain with the most backlinks to this Moz guide is ryangum.com.
It has almost 378K backlinks. Let’s click on that number and see what they are.
Aaaannnndddd… I see only 10.
Useless.
It’s a completely different story in Ahrefs, as they show everything – it’s even downloadable.
And again, I’ll reiterate the point I touched on earlier – some of the backlink numbers are absolutely crazy in Majestic thanks to the duplicated backlinks with URL parameters.
Case in point:
(I guess Majestic doesn’t care about URL parameters?)
But anyway… let’s move on.
Let’s start with Majestic.
In the Ref.domains report, there was at least some sorting options – here there are none.
All they give you is option to show/hide deleted links and display 1/3/10/all backlinks per domain.
I can see how one backlink per domain is useful, but three and ten… c’mon!
It almost feels like someone was desperate to come up with some kind of useful functionality here, but failed miserably.
Regardless, none of these restrictions matter anyway because this report (like the rest) only shows a sample of 30k rows out of almost 100k. That means Majestic are hiding 70% of the links they know about from you.
Luckily, things are more logical in Ahrefs.
First things first, their Backlinks report doesn’t show sampled data – it’s full data.
You can also choose to show either Similar links, One link per domain, or All links.
This report defaults to Group similar links. This makes sense, as it groups sitewide and duplicated links, but still shows unique links from unique pages of the same domain. Which is pretty cool.
Is this report perfect? No. I’ve seen a few bugs here and there, but the usability and convenience of this filter still beats Majestic’s useless “3/10 links per domain” filter by a wide margin.
You probably already spotted those other filters too – Link type, Platform, and Language.
I recommend playing around with these – they’re really cool!
There are also some sorting options, including:
Combining sorting AND filtering is when you really start to do some cool stuff.
For example, you could filter by dofollow links only, from English sites only, and then sort by DR.
Seriously, play around this this report – you can do TONS.
Here’s one final report I want to briefly highlight (this one is specific to Ahrefs):
Ahrefs is MUCH MORE than just a backlink checking tool. They have world-class search traffic data too.
Yes, there are other tools have one of the two (e.g., Majestic with their backlink data) but Ahrefs does an amazing job of merging backlink and search traffic data together.
I don’t think there’s a better example of this than in their Top Pages report.
This shows the “top pages” on a domain by search traffic.
But this report is super cool because it also shows:
There’s also a keywords dropdown which unveils ALL the keywords each page is ranking for.
Majestic has nothing like this, so there’s nothing to compare here.
I mentioned earlier that Ahrefs is much more than a backlink checking tool.
It’s actually a suite of SEO tools.
Content Explorer is one tool I want to highlight here – this is a database of almost a billion web pages complete with backlinks and traffic data.
Basically, you enter a keyword and it’ll return any content containing (in either the title or body of the article, depending on your selection).
Here are the results for “SEO”:
The highlighted region shows some of the cool data that Content Explorer shows for each and every results – there’s Domain Rating, referring domains, and organic traffic.
I’m not aware of any other tool that can do this and honestly, it’s super-useful! And let’s not forget the “who tweeted” button which is useful for any content marketers out there.
But what about Majestic? Where does that shine?
Well there are some cool things that I like, such as their Trust Flow and Citation Flow metrics.
If you’ve read my guide to finding expired domains, you’ll already know that I look at a ratio of these two metrics to find decent domains.
I’m also a fan of Majestic’s Topical Trust Flow metric, which is super useful for getting a sense of how relevant a backlink profile is.
However, I’ve found that this isn’t always particularly accurate.
You can see in the screenshot above that mythemeshop.com (a website selling premium Wordpress themes including my theme) falls into the ‘Health’ category when looking at Topical Trust Flow.
That doesn’t seem right to me.
So as you can see, the tool that’s most useful for you will depend on the kind of data that you’re trying to access.
I have to be honest though:
For me, Ahrefs is my go-to tool for almost everything these days. I’d say Majestic does maybe 10-20% of what Ahrefs does, and that’s being generous!
Irrespective of opinion, bias and discreditation – the data does not lie.
The data never lies, its why I love working with data so much. Want to settle which design is better? Test it.
Want to see which is the best backlink checker? Test it.
Data does not lie.
Ahrefs is clearly the winner here by a huge margin – a much larger margin than my initial test with just 3 domains highlighted.
In the Wins by IP test, Ahrefs finds 216% more than Majestic SEO. They are winning on ~76% of domains compared to Majestic SEO’s ~24%.
In the Wins by Subnets test, Ahrefs is also the clear winner finding 306% more links than Majestic SEO. They are winning on ~80% of domains compared to Majestic SEO’s ~20%.
So quite clearly, the best backlink checker is Ahrefs. PERIOD.
Even if the source data is Majestic SEO’s very own Majestic Million – Ahrefs still knows more about them than Majestic does.
Unless you only care about who has the biggest database of dead links of course.
And let’s not forget about all of the other awesome tools Ahrefs has – it is so much more than a backlink checker.
In an effort to be unbiased and transparent, I have 2 seperate ways for you to independently verify the data yourself.
All of the data used in this test is available to download here.
This is the easiest way to spot check the data.
You can manually spot check these at random!
What if you want to verify the data for all million domains though?
Well for that you will need a linux server with shell access, an Ahrefs API key and these files.
WARNING: Before you do this be aware that 1,000,000 API credits with Ahrefs costs $10,000.
For full transparency’s sake Ahrefs gave me an API key with 1,000,000 credits so I could run this test.
If any established bloggers want to confirm these results themselves and publish on their blog then please get in touch with me.
Anyway here is how to do it-
Remember folks regardless of all of the controversy the data does not lie.
The simple fact is Ahrefs knows 216% more about Majestic SEO’s Majestic Million than they do (compared to 57% when I first ran this test in April 2013)
And if you haven’t checked out Ahrefs for a while you might be surprised, because it has evolved from a simple backlink checker to a complete SEO tool.
You can sign up for an Ahrefs account here to check it out for yourself.
And, if you’re on a budget and want to get more information about free tools, check out the Ahrefs Webmaster Tools as well as my free seo tools list.
Next time you see this topic in a forum – feel free to use this post to instantly win the argument.
887 Responses
Leave a Reply Cancel reply
Increase Your Search Traffic
In Just 28 Days…
If I was putting money aside and PURELY wanted to download all the backlinks pointing to my site, I would buy-AhrefsMajesticMozInsypder backlink monitorBut only on the basis that those tools align to my current business goals because different business goals require different tools and I have no idea what you are trying to achieve.If we aren’t putting money aside and you are on a budget then yes, SERPED does 90% of the job for most people but again without knowing what you are trying to achieve this entire conversation is meaningless.
putting money aside, would you use serped.net as your everyday backlink and site checker? And if you had to pick on resource, even if serped.net is not “the best” but does a good enough job for 90% of people out there, with all the services you get for such a low cost, is it still worth it?
So then who do you recommend? Ahrefs or serped.net since you recommended serped.net as the last tool any of us need? Does it hold up to your backlink checking needs still?https://searchlogistics.com/seo/reviews/serped/
It depends what you want/what you need/the problems you are trying to solve/your budget.
A great read particularly as it was started in 2013. Is it still your preference to this day? I’m currently reviewing all products…. thanks
It is indeedy 🙂
Great research Matthew !Really, my friend referred me to a platform which is much beneficial for me to learn and implementing necessary SEO tips.Thanks for sharing such a nice information.-Nitin
No problem Nitin 🙂
In short: good inside of website’s serp, competiton comparisson and on page SEO quality for dutch Google (.nl)
Thanks again Matthew, but is Ahref a good total product as Majestic is?
It depends what you want to do
Thanks Matt for Sharing…im a Ahrefs avocate. confirmed.
That makes two of us 🙂
1 Million Dollar SEO is very trendy
In what sense?
thanks for the amazing article, ahref is best.
They are indeed 🙂
WOW! That is all I can say about this post and the comments that follow, thanks Matt for putting so much detail into your posts I really feel like there is no stone left unturned here. You mentioned you might be doing a 2015 update to this post is that correct?
I’m thinking about it 🙂
Great article, im using ahrefs and love it.
Who doesn’t! (except Dixon ofc)
Yes! I’ve just read the whole thing AND all the comments!Matthew.. I’m speechless…
Good stuff =D
Well based on my spot checks, Ahrefs still nails it – but a wider look would be interesting
You should. Maybe there’s been some improvements … it would be interesting.
Excellent article and excellent comparison. I have been following this since you started this comparison and have been very interested in watching it as it unfolds. I knew you were going to ignite a small war but I did not realize it would be this large :)I appreciate the open, honest and transparent approach … the best way!
Hahaha I was thinking about doing a 2015 update
Very good..
Thanks Abdur!
I would like to thank all the parties for an excellent discussion. I have a question. The information here deals with gross amounts of data; does anyone know if ahrefs has any competitive advantage in terms of what majestic calls trust flow and citation flow? I agree, it is better to have more data for analysis, but I would prefer to discover fewer links pointing at competitors but to know better how relevant they are to specific topics. Thank you.
This is a really good look at what’s current in the world of backlink indexes. I think Majestic and Ahrefs are close enough in their reach that it doesn’t make a huge difference in practical terms. OTOH I’ve often seen people focusing on Moz’s index of authority links for the majority of their research, even if it’s a smaller sample of links overall it’s “curated” towards really solid links. The other two can be extremely useful to really drill down into a domain’s whole link profile, including all low-authority links – for example for backlink audits and cleanups.
That’s a great perspective 🙂
Hey Matt, just came across this post from one of your emails, I have been looking into a better back link checker and after reading this think I will try ahrefs, cheers mate.
Thanks Patrick – it is still the best backlink checker in my opinion 🙂
Oh definitely, I can imagine they are reading this right now!!
A great blog post, personally we have used open site explorer which is simple and easy to use. Along with having majestic as well, both of these are cost effective (or realistic) Ahrefs for us seems a little bit high on price for what it is, but saying that you do get what you pay for. But with the ever fast paced world of SEO, we have extensively been testing ahrefs, and it for sure gives you much higher amounts of backlinks than the others. It’ll be interesting to see what 2015 holds for online marketing!
I’m pretty sure every service is working to improve
Am using ashraf from last three years , they show backlinks very fast the then other seo tools and have a lot of healthy tools, I think hard work is must for seo purposes
Great post Matt, Ahrefs wins hands down without the 1 mil URL test. They are far quicker at finding links and they have a far nicer website that displays data better!The way Majestic have responded to the test just makes them look like a bunch of dicks. They could have handled it far better by accepting the data as what it is and improving on what they do.
I wouldn’t say all of Majestic, just 1 person in particular.
Hello: Good information sharing with usthanks.
No problem 🙂
For Matthew : Thanks alot for amazing analysis.Worth reading.For Majestic : Do not show your anger show your work.Let Your Work Speak for Itself.Make your product better than Ahref.For Ahref : Keep it up:)
But Majestic is better than Ahrefs already! Ahrefs is decent for link building but Majestic is much better (and cheaper)!
Wow Matt what a great post, in Majestic HQ they´ll be on fire.I hope they get a fireman close.
Yeah they weren’t so happy about it
Ahrefs it’s also ma favorite tool :-), but sometimes majestic provides complementary and valuable information and datas!In this area i’ve tested another interesting tool, cognitiveseo, which also gives another perspective of the offpage optimization and link building strategy.I’ve notticed that all these big players in the SEO world have their own metrics based on different factors, it is quite hard sometimes to make a decision based on only one tool results. Anyway, this is one of greatest comparison seen lately, it was needed by one like that, hard and fine work!
None of these “SEO” sites are worth the subscription fees. None of the data is accurate.
Nope, which is why you combine data points from all!
for those of us not wanting a paid account just yet, am I right in thinking that Magestic offers a better starter package? It looks like it from where I’m sitting
If your going to do something, do it right the first time 🙂
i think that’s ahrefs is the best
I agree 😛
Majestic should update their UI and their are back in business 🙂 New fancy look will help them for sure. And for me it is still quantity vs quality thing. But yes, waiting for new test.
Yeah I agree I never liked their interface
I’d do a retest. I agree ahrefs seems to show more results however for choosing potential network sites I’d take majestics trust factor over ahrefs metrics any day.One example I have a site, 2 months old, #1 for the primary keyword, ahrefs shows zero for both url and domain rank, majestic shows 29 TF and 22 CF. The links are strong not many of them but good links. Majestic shows 12 links, ahrefs 15. So yes ahrefs picks up the links better but for giving an overall assessment of a site majestic is both quicker and more accurate. I think your new test needs to take into account the serps positions. You’d need to do an extensive test on both new and aged domains, quite an undertaking. Your test above looks accurate as regards to link volume but actual quality of the site, majestic is better, important when checking sites to link from. I’d be interested in a test which shows which one returns the better metrics for sites to link from. As you’ll know you can rank a site #1 with relatively few links but quality links.I don’t argue with the results of the original test, ahrefs has always been that way but anyone nowadays the game has changed, I’ve never really been concerned with how many links I see but where I see the site in the serps, isn’t that the whole point. I’d even be happy to randomly select 15 or so sites from different niches (not mine) we could analyze the the data between majestic and ahrefs for differing purposes e.g potential network sites, link count, quality etc. Feel free to email me if you’re interested.All the best.
Looks like I’m a bit late on the uptake but good read nevertheless. Matt dropping it like it’s hot! Thumbs up
Haha thanks Andy!
I think 1 year is a lot of time in seo world, and specially in software development. Maybe is time for a new test?I did my test one month ago, and each script is offering different data. And my test was done with more then 10 scripts (no names). Regardless of the fancy design and new graphs, people don’t realize that graphs can look very attractive, but if the links analyzed are only 10% from the total, all the results are fake!A higher price for a more accurate data is always a good deal. So maybe you get some time Matt, for a new test, hopefully a bigger/better one with more sites and more scripts(software).Maybe we can do it in a group of 10-50 people, in this way CEO’s will understand that we are real:)
Hi,Yes I do agree although it sounds like your in the best position to run the follow up!
Sod it, i’ve just signed up for Majestic, largely because they are UK-based although I do own the Link assistant products too. I get a totally different backlink count from Market Samurai and SEM, 2 services that I use albeit not primarily for link info.The point is, you will never get the same answer twice and you’ll never know which is right – if any of them are, you just have to go with your instincts. Until now, that is. It would be a shame for me not to take Matthew’s massive survey into account, i’m off to switch to Ahrefs too. Thanks.
We just discovered that ahrefs more than doubled the cost of their basic paid services today, when our subscription was up. We have tried to work with them in the past by offering them a group of of attorneys to buy their services at a discount, but they don’t seem to be interested. For the price they are charging, we are considering switching to Majestic. There comes a point where the prices are simply outrageous. Anyone have any ideas of an alternative product? What can’t Majestic do the same thing? The data is there. Why can’t they help us get prices down by being more competitive?
Hi,I think the prices are very reasonable and Ahrefs are competitive already. Yes there are cheaper alternatives, but the alternatives don’t have any way near the amount of links that Ahrefs does.
Wow Matt what a great post, in Majestic HQ they’ll be on fire.
Yeah probably, but mehhh!
Usually I don’t read post on blogs, however I wish to say that this write-up very forced me to check out and do so!Your writing taste has been amazed me. Thanks, quite nice article.
Haha thanks Grant 🙂
I do not even know how I ended up here, but I thought this post was good.I don’t know who you are but definitely you are going to a famous blogger if you are not already 😉 Cheers!
Haha glad you enjoyed the post 🙂
Given the choice, I’d use Ahrefs over Majestic anyday. I think others may disagree with me but personally, I find it simpler to use (and therefore more efficient). Also the larger link base is quite helpful as well.
That makes two of us =D
Great post on the test provided on these 2 giant. Appreciate the effort Matt. With tools like spider spankers blocking the bots, a wide variety of tools to checkout all the links can really helps to ensure more backlinks are uncovered.
No worrys 🙂
Great post, testing is so important, your blog is really head’s and tails above the rest in this field. Seriously, no ass kissing. Well, I do like Terry Kyle as well…but you know what I mean.I would saying using multiple tools is the best of all worlds, but that’s just my two cents.Cheers!
Thanks for your kind words 🙂
Hi Matt,when you need to choose between ahrefs and SEMRush, which one do you choose and why?Thank you.
They do very different things, that’s like asking to choose between a car and a lawn mower
It is just an amazing comparison which is so useful to me. Thanks Matt.
Glad it helped!
Hey Matt, I read your post on the warrior forum that you were going to get everyone to switch to some new tool. So just wanted to check: Is ahrefs.com still your #1 recommendation? Or have things changed?
It sure is – https://searchlogistics.com/seo/tools/backlink-checkers/
At the end of the day, controversy is healthy. Competition will sharpen everyone’s sword and we as the consumer will benefit the most.Thanks Matt for being detailed in your follow through and research.Your observations and training have helped me tremendously!Regards,Scott in Boston
No worrys man, thanks for your kind words!
Hi matt,great post! I have been long regretted to buy an annual subscription of MajesticSEO, which refuses to improve for years at the perspective of end customer. Ahrefs are for better than MajesticSEO regarding to data sets and user interface.I am back on you !
Sorry to hear that!
Truth be told, most people just need a “standard” to apply in a test. You’re taking two controls and comparing them.I would say, for 95% of users needing these tool services just need a CONSISTENT measure of checking.The truth comes out in consistency. I would rather be consistently wrong that right one time and wrong the next.With that said, I don’t think either of them are “wrong” and both pose good solutions for the industry. ______________I’m traveling now, so I just came up with this reference. The rent-a-car place just asked me if I wanted an economy car or a compact. What’s the difference? Both get 30MPG and are tiny Mr Bean style cars. Different to some aspects that really don’t matter to the large masses of people who just need to set of wheels for the weekend.
The difference is this case, is both services don’t run at 30 MPG.
Be careful!!! Ahrefs doesn’t provide any info about automatic subscription prolongation. They just charge you without any alert! It was a shock because I didn’t want use the service for the next month. After all they didn’t even try to excuse!
The pricing plan page allows you to choose between monthly or annual billing. The word used on the buy button is ‘Subscribe Now’Perhaps you should read things properly 🙂