• About Us
  • Contributors
  • Guides
  • Speaking Engagements
  • Write for The SEM Post
  • Submit a tip or contact us!
  • Newsletters

The SEM Post

Latest News About SEO, SEM, PPC & Search Engines

  • Google
  • SEO
  • Mobile
  • Local
  • Bing
  • Pay Per Click
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • State of the Industry
You are here: Home / Google / Canonicals: Sitemap Canonicals Weaker Signal Than Rel=Canonical

Canonicals: Sitemap Canonicals Weaker Signal Than Rel=Canonical

February 19, 2018 at 5:58 am PST By Jennifer Slegg

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Google+
  • Pinterest
  • LinkedIn
  • Email
  • WhatsApp
  • Evernote
  • SMS

Using rel=canonicals on webpages has been the default standard for referencing canonicals.  But for larger sites, some have been utilizing sitemaps for showing Google their canonicals.  Google has updated their help page on canonicals and it now includes information on how it views canonicals in different formats.

Most notably, Google now states officially that canonicals in sitemaps is considered a “less powerful signal” than using rel=canonical.

Later in the help document, in a collapsed section, Google reiterates this by stating “We don’t guarantee that we’ll consider the sitemap URLs to be canonical, but it is a simple way of defining canonicals for a large site, and sitemaps are a useful way to tell Google which pages you consider most important on your site.”

Why would this be considered a weaker signal compared to using rel=canonical?  Many sitemap generators used by websites by default include every URL on the site in those sitemap, even pages that have their own rel=canonical references.  So while this could be a valid signal for some sites, this fact so many sites include both the canonical and non-canonical URLs in their sitemaps means that this isn’t a reliable method for those.  And some site owners don’t even realize that sitemaps could have an influence on their canonicals.

Also throwing confusion for using sitemap canonicals as a signal, some sites don’t keep their sitemaps updated as often as their sites, meaning it could also be outdated for canonical purposes.

Lastly, even if sitemap canonicals are done properly, the sitemap should only reference the canonical page, meaning it would still be up to Google to determine which of the duplicate or near-duplicate pages should be the ones associated with each canonical in the sitemap, and this isn’t always perfect.  This is something that many SEOs would prefer to direct to Google themselves using rel=canonical rather than letting Google be the ones to decide which pages are mapped to which canonical.

If you are needing to use canonicals to specify to Google which page should be indexed, you should still be using rel=canonical as your go to canonical usage.

H/T Aleyda Solis

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Google+
  • Pinterest
  • LinkedIn
  • Email
  • WhatsApp
  • Evernote
  • SMS
The following two tabs change content below.
  • Bio
  • Latest Posts
My Twitter profileMy Facebook profileMy Google+ profileMy LinkedIn profile

Jennifer Slegg

Founder & Editor at The SEM Post
Jennifer Slegg is a longtime speaker and expert in search engine marketing, working in the industry for almost 20 years. When she isn't sitting at her desk writing and working, she can be found grabbing a latte at her local Starbucks or planning her next trip to Disneyland. She regularly speaks at Pubcon, SMX, State of Search, Brighton SEO and more, and has been presenting at conferences for over a decade.
My Twitter profileMy Facebook profileMy Google+ profileMy LinkedIn profile

Latest posts by Jennifer Slegg (see all)

  • 2022 Update for Google Quality Rater Guidelines – Big YMYL Updates - August 1, 2022
  • Google Quality Rater Guidelines: The Low Quality 2021 Update - October 19, 2021
  • Rethinking Affiliate Sites With Google’s Product Review Update - April 23, 2021
  • New Google Quality Rater Guidelines, Update Adds Emphasis on Needs Met - October 16, 2020
  • Google Updates Experiment Statistics for Quality Raters - October 6, 2020

Filed Under: Google, SEO

Sign up for our newsletter


Comments

  1. WillHaven says

    February 27, 2018 at 12:59 pm

    I wonder if we can assume the same for hreflang and rel=alternate (mobile) in sitemaps, too?

Founder & Editor

Jennifer Slegg (2052)

Sign up for our daily news recap & weekly newsletter.


Follow us online

  • Facebook
  • Google+
  • Linkedin
  • Pinterest
  • Twitter

Latest News

2022 Update for Google Quality Rater Guidelines – Big YMYL Updates

We finally have the first Google Quality Rater Guidelines update of 2022, and like usual, it is … [Read More...]

Recent Posts

  • 2022 Update for Google Quality Rater Guidelines – Big YMYL Updates
  • Google Quality Rater Guidelines: The Low Quality 2021 Update
  • Rethinking Affiliate Sites With Google’s Product Review Update
  • New Google Quality Rater Guidelines, Update Adds Emphasis on Needs Met
  • Google Updates Experiment Statistics for Quality Raters
  • Analyzing “How Google Search Works” Changes from Google
  • Google Quality Rater Guidelines Update: New Introduction, Rater Bias & Political Affiliations
  • Google Updates Quality Rater Guidelines: Reputation for News Sites; Video Content Updates; Quality for Information Sites
  • Google Makes Major Changes to NoFollow, Adds Sponsored & UGC Tags
  • Google Updates Quality Rater Guidelines Targeting E-A-T, Page Quality & Interstitials

Categories

  • Affiliate Marketing
  • Amazon
  • Apple
  • Bing
  • Branding
  • Browsers
  • Chrome
  • Content Marketing
  • Design
  • Domains
  • DuckDuckGo
  • Email
  • Facebook
  • Firefox
  • Foursquare
  • Google
    • Analytics
    • Google RankBrain
    • Quality Rater's Guidelines
  • History of Search
  • Industry Spotlight
  • Instagram
  • Internet Explorer
  • Links
  • Local
  • Mobile
  • Native Advertising
  • Other Search Engines
  • Pay Per Click
  • Pinterest
  • Publishers
  • Security
  • SEO
  • Snapchat
  • Social Media
  • State of the Industry
  • The SEM Post
  • Tools
  • Twitter
  • Uncategorized
  • User Experience
  • Video Marketing
  • Week in Review
  • Whitepapers
  • Wordpress
  • Yahoo
  • Yelp
  • YouTube
June 2025
MTWTFSS
« Aug  
 1
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
30 

Meta

  • Log in
  • Entries RSS
  • Comments RSS
  • WordPress.org

Copyright © 2025 · News Pro Theme On Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in