Commentary
Pharma Brands Losing At SEO, Link-Building Techniques
- by Laurie Sullivan , Staff Writer @lauriesullivan, December 8, 2011
A study released by Covario Thursday identifies missed opportunities by marketers at pharmaceutical companies that do not optimize Web sites for search engines or tap into link-building techniques. Pharma advertisers investing in link building and SEO could own the search results, according to the report.
Covario discovered that Link Audit Scores are low among all the pharmaceutical advertisers analyzed, so even the smallest difference in linking can drive higher rank performance. The study finds that landing pages with Link Audit Scores of more than 15 and possessing an average of 28,000 inbound links can surely hit a return on the first page of a query, whereas landing pages with Link Audit Scores under 15 and possessing an average of 9,600 inbound links will not show until the seventh page of the search results.
GlaxoSmithKline, Abbot Laboratories, Bristol Myers-Squibb, Allergan, Amgen, Biogen Idec, Mylan, Gilead, and Genzyme all sit below the remaining advertiser Web sites ordered by their respective SEO Audit Scores.
Which Web sites ranked best at SEO among all the pharmaceutical advertisers? When Covario analyzed results for the keyword "pharmaceutical," Pfizer ranked No. 1, followed by Merck at No. 2, Astrazeneca, No. 3, and Johnson & Johnson, No. 4. Bayer, Eli Lilly, and Novartis are tied for No. 5.
The report analyzes the "category-defining keyword" used to measure the SEO health of the top pharma advertisers through a list of words that best define the industry. Using a Google Keyword Tool to prioritize the keywords based on search volume, the initial list included Medicine, Drugs, Healthcare, and Pharmaceutical.
Covario then analyzed the search engine results for each of the keywords to identify where within the results each of the advertiser Web sites rank, and the URLs of the landing pages associated with the keyword.
The study found that none of the advertisers ranked in the top 100 list for the highest-volume keywords drugs and medicine. As for health care, which was nearly as popular, only Bayer barely cracked the top 100.
The study points out that although the keyword “pharmaceutical” returns 7 million monthly searches on Google, this figure is nearly four times less than for the words "medicine" and "drugs," and more than two times less than for the word "healthcare."
The analysis was conducted in September 2011. It is based on the U.S. Web sites of the top advertisers in the pharmaceutical industry.
Laurie Sullivan is a writer and editor for MediaPost. You can reach Laurie at lauriesullivan@gmail.com.
I think Covario's study would be worth mentioning if they had looked at keywords these pharma companies might actually care to rank for. It is doubtful that potential customers are using the terms "pharmaceutical", "medicine" or "drugs".
I don't think Covario did a thorough research here. FDA regulations play a big role when it comes to Pharma companies getting inbound links, even if they are well-intentioned. This study is worth nothing without adding a few lines about the legal aspect, otherwise is just a mere speculation.
Sadly, it's these kinds of analyses that underscore just how much the SEO industry has overextended its dependency upon links. With an average 9600 links per landing page being deemed inadequate (when in fact this is an extraordinary average compared to all pages across the Web), clearly the verticals are hyperoptimized and these companies need to back off on their link building, not accelerate it.
It's worth noting that Covario simply did this "study" to get published and get people to talk to them and generate leads. But they would be hard pressed to get any big pharma business though. And if they do, they will learn soon enough just how wrong they are.