Competing with comparison sites in the SERPs can feel like a losing game, but it doesn't have to. In today's Whiteboard Friday, Rand explains the challenges and outlines five solutions that can help you begin ranking for those high-value comparative terms.

Click on the whiteboard image above to open a high-resolution version in a new tab!

Video Transcription

Howdy, Moz fans, and welcome to this impossible edition of Whiteboard Friday. This week we're chatting about one of the toughest things that a lot of SEOs face, which is trying to rank for these specific types of queries that have a plural comparative intent behind them.

Some examples:

So I'll give you a bunch of examples just to set the stage for this.

Let's say I'm a hotel operator in Edinburgh, and I run one individual hotel, maybe a boutique hotel, and I want to rank for "best hotels in Edinburgh." But that is nearly impossible, because if you look at the front page of results, all the folks there are comparative types of sites. They're media properties. They're hotel comparison shopping sites. So it's TripAdvisor and Telegraph and US News & World Report, and This is Edinburgh, which is a media magazine there.

If I want to rank for "compare headphones" and I am the maker of one particular type of headphones, it's incredibly difficult to outrank a PC Magazine, Forbes, HeadphonesCompare.com, CNET, Reevoo. This is an incredible challenge, right?

"Best Broadway shows," if I'm operating a new Broadway show and I want to come up for this, which would be really meaningful for my Broadway show, which, by the way, most of them lose money. It's an incredibly tough business. NYC Theatre, Time Out, Broadway.com, how do I get in there?

Or let's say I'm in the software field. I'm FullContact, and I want to rank for "FullContact versus Clearbit." There are lots of comparative types of searches like this. If you search for your brand name or your product's brand name and "versus," you'll almost certainly come up with a bunch of suggestions. Well, it turns out neither FullContact nor Clearbit rank for this type of query. It's Inbound.org and StackShare and Quora and Analyzo.

For "Android word games," if I've come out with a new word game, it could be huge for me to rank for this term. But you know what? It's going to be Android Central and Google Play, Tom's Guide, Android Headlines, right?

If I have a new TV comedy, it would be fantastic because a lot of people are searching for "TV comedies" or "TV comedies on Netflix" or what have you. If I was Netflix or if I were some of these folks, I would love to come up here. But instead, it's UPROXX and Ranker and IMDB. It's comparative media sites almost always.

The problems

So what do we do? The first step is we have to identify the problem, like what is fundamentally going on. Why is it that these types of sites consistently outperform? This is not universal, but it's close enough, especially on competitive head terms, like some of these, where it gets close to impossible or feels that way.

I. It's really tough to rank without using the right words and phrases.

If you are a boutique hotel in Edinburgh, you might not be very comfortable using words like Hilton or Marriott or some of these other words that are branded terms that are owned by your competition. There could be legal issues around that, but it might also just be a brand guidelines type of thing. So that's one part of the hard problem.

II. It's really hard to rank without serving the searcher's true intent.

In these cases, the searcher's intent is, "I want to compare multiples of these things." So if you have an individual hotel website or an individual headphone website, an individual Android word game, that's not actually answering the searcher's intent. It used to be easier, back before RankBrain and before Google got really smart with Hummingbird around their query intent understanding. But these days, very, very challenging. So that's the second one.

III. It's really hard to get links, hard to get links when you're purely promotional or self-interested, you're just one brand trying to outrank these folks, because these types of pieces of content seem sort of less selfish. The comparisons feel less self-interested, and therefore it's easier for them to get organic links.

So tough challenge here. Three big issues that we have to address.

5 primary solutions

There actually are some solutions. There are some ways that some very creative and clever folks have worked around this in the past, and you can use them as well.

1. You can try separating your media or your blog or editorial content.

By separate, I mean one of two ways. You could go with a wholly separate domain. That's pretty tough. You won't inherit the domain authority. It will probably be a new domain, so that will be a challenge. Or you simply separate it editorially, such that it's segmented from the promotional content. Moz actually does this, and, as a result, we rank for a lot of these types of queries. We even rank for a lot of SEO software types of queries that are clearly comparative, because we have that editorial independence in our editorial content. So this is one way you can go about doing that.

2. You could try a guest posting strategy or a guest contribution.

So if you can go out to the websites that are already listed here or ones like them, those independent, editorial, media-driven properties and say, "Hey, I will contribute to this as an independent author or writer. Yes, I work for this brand, but I think when you see my content, you will see that I've done my research and I am not biased." If you can prove that to the editors at these publications, you can often prove that to the audience as well, and then you can earn these types of rankings.

You can actually see an example of this. I think it was, yes, I think the Forbes contributor here, I suspect they worked either with or for or at least in conjunction with a brand, because it seemed like they had a preference behind them and the author had a connection there.

3. You can commission independent research.

This is something that a lot of big companies will do. They'll go out and they'll say, "Hey, you're an independent research firm that's well-trusted. Will you do some research in our particular space?" Then hopefully it's something that the press will pick up. It's these press websites that you're actually hoping are going to earn the rankings over here.

I will say while most of the folks doing this right now are very large companies with big research budgets and big advertising and promotional budgets, you don't have to be. You can go and contract a single expert in the field, someone that you trust to do a great job, and you can say, "Hey, you already contribute to CNET, you already contribute to Time Out, you're already a contributor to Tom's Guide or Android Headlines or whatever it is. Could you do this independent research? We'll pay you. Whatever the results you find, we'll pay you regardless." That can be quite successful.

4. If you need to do it yourself, but you don't want to keep it on your own site, you could use a microsite.

So creating a site like if I'm Q over here and I'm XvsYvsQ.com, I'm not sure the exact match domain is precisely the route I'd take, but conceivably that microsite can perform well in these searches, and there are several examples, few and far between though they are, of this strategy working.

5. Win all the lists.

So if I want to rank in "best Broadway shows," well, maybe I could just be "Hamilton." If I want to win at "compare headphones," maybe I could invent that patent on the noise-cancelling headphones that Bose have, which, by the way, win like three out of five of these. If I want to win the FullContact versus Clearbit, well, I need the features and the functionality and the things that these reviewers are using in order to win.

There's almost always a bunch of objective criteria that you can identify by looking through these SERPs and related SERPs to figure out what you need to do. The challenge is it's not just a marketing or an SEO or a content problem. Now it becomes a product and a positioning and oftentimes an engineering problem as well in order to have that win. But now you've got the strategies, hard though it may be. This is not impossible. It's just difficult.

All right. Look forward to your comments and we'll see you again next week for another edition of Whiteboard Friday. Take care.

Video transcription by Speechpad.com