How to choose the best canonical URL

[Critical_Mass]

In a duplicate content situation, and assuming that both rel=canonical and a 301 redirect pass link equity (I know there is still some speculation on this), how should you choose the "best" version of the URL to establish as the redirect target or authoritative URL?

For example, we have a series of duplicate pages on our site. Typically we choose the "cleanest" or shortest non-trailing-slash version of the URL as the canonical, but what if those pages are already established and have varying page authority/backlink profiles? The URLs are:

example.com/stores/locate/index?parameters=tags - PA = 54, Inbound Links = 259

example.com/stores/locate/index - PA = 60, Inbound Links = 302

example.com/stores/ - This is the version that currently ranks. PA = 42, Inbound Links = 3

example.com/stores - PA = 40, Inbound Links = 8

This might not really even matter, but in the interests of conserving as much SEO value as possible, which would you choose as either the 301 redirect target and/or the canonical version? My gut is to go with the URL that's already ranking (example.com/stores/) but curious if PA, backlinks, and trailing slashes should be considered also.

We of course would not 301 the URL with the tracking parameters.

Thanks for your help!

[Linda-Vassily]

In general, you will get the most links to a page via whatever URL is easiest for the linker to grab, so often it is not the prettiest, with parameters and such. But you really don't want that showing up in the serps, so don't use that as a canonical.

As far as the trailing slash/no slash issue, most people will use the no slash version if they are choosing how to add a link, even when the slash version would be more correct (as in your example) so you would also expect to see more links there.

But you mention that the slash version is the ranking version in your example. Is this mostly true throughout the site? (Maybe it is a Wordpress site that ends everything with slashes?) Then I'd stick with that. (I myself use the rule you first mentioned, the cleanest, non-slash version, but my site doesn't use trailing forward slashes.)

Do keep it consistent though. It would be a pain to always be checking pages to see what the canonical should be. The amount of SEO value you might lose is minimal.

[Critical_Mass]

Thanks Linda! With regards to the trailing slash, typically we do set the non-trailing slash version as the canonical version across our site. So in this case, would you recommend that we stick with the non-trailing slash version for consistency's sake, even if it seems like it has lower SEO value?

Or would you go with the trailing slash version since it's the one currently ranking, and seems to have the more value; or even the longer URL with the highest PA/backlinks?

Thanks again!

[Linda-Vassily]

I like to keep the canonical neat so it looks better in the serps so as to encourage future users to click on it (people like clean, readable URLs), so I try not to use unnecessarily complex URLs. I have had very good luck in canonicalizing messy URLs with decent authority to new, completely non-ranking but clean, URLs and not only keeping but growing page authority.

And I have a fairly large site which is crawled regularly so I do value consistency--whichever page is set as the canonical will eventually become the ranking page, so current rank is not the biggest issue to me. In the long run, consistency will make your life (and the life of anyone who follows you in your present position) easier. (That being said, it wouldn't hurt anything if you prefer to use what is currently ranking.)