Considering a Competitor's Lost Links

[becool]

One of the things I have been focused on in terms of off-page SEO efforts is matching and exceeding competitors’ backlink profiles, especially in terms of quality and, as of late, quantity (to the extent possible, given practical limitations on building quality links at scale).

In so doing, I may use AHREFs to inspect the number (and quality) of backlinks a particular competitor has procured within the last 30 days. However, something I have not invested as much thought in historically is the number of backlinks that same competitor has lost during the same 30-day time period. In retrospect, it’s as though I have been missing half of the equation.

To what extent should the loss of a competitor’s backlinks play in my analysis of a competitor’s backlink profile, given my intended purpose of matching and exceeding what they have procured?

Secondarily, to what extent should I account for inaccuracies in the number of purportedly lost links (e.g. a page one article containing a backlink that gets pushed to page two isn’t a lost link per se, but AHREFs still, in a couple of instances at least, reported several such backlinks as lost)?

Thanks

 

[The Engineer]

In retrospect, it’s as though I have been missing half of the equation. To what extent should the loss of a competitor’s backlinks play in my analysis of a competitor’s backlink profile, given my intended purpose of matching and exceeding what they have procured?

I wouldn't say it's half of the equation, but @Ryuzaki has told me that he's seen things that make him suspect that Google still respects a link that has been lost to some degree. He called them "Ghost Links". I'll let him elaborate.

Secondarily, to what extent should I account for inaccuracies in the number of purportedly lost links (e.g. a page one article containing a backlink that gets pushed to page two isn’t a lost link per se, but AHREFs still, in a couple of instances at least, reported several such backlinks as lost)?

Does Ahrefs have a way to filter links by type? I can't remember, but if they do I would only bother looking at contextual links. Like you said, this takes time and you might as well focus on the needle moving links than worry about blog comments disappearing.

You should also consider why it is links disappeared and do you want to go through the effort to get the link with an increased risk of it also being removed. It could have been because of a site redesign and no 301's put in place. I see that all of the time. But if it's someone cleaning house or a domain being repurposed, these aren't ones you want to go after. I want links that are going to stick around for a long time.

 

[becool]

I wouldn't say it's half of the equation, but @Ryuzaki has told me that he's seen things that make him suspect that Google still respects a link that has been lost to some degree. He called them "Ghost Links". I'll let him elaborate.

This explains what I am seeing with a couple of competitor sites that have lost a significant number of links over time (and continue to do so) but appear to be replacing the lost links at the same or a similar rate (as the loss).

Does Ahrefs have a way to filter links by type? I can't remember, but if they do I would only bother looking at contextual links.

AHREFs does have that ability, come to think of it. You can sort by "contextual" links, which isn't something I've done before. Thanks

You should also consider why it is links disappeared and do you want to go through the effort to get the link with an increased risk of it also being removed. It could have been because of a site redesign and no 301's put in place. I see that all of the time. But if it's someone cleaning house or a domain being repurposed, these aren't ones you want to go after. I want links that are going to stick around for a long time.

I agree with the above. I think the take home message is that I'm probably reading too much into the lost links angle and just need to continue to focus on moving the needle, as you alluded to above.