Redirect to http to https - Pros and Cons

[FreddyKgapza]

Hi,

I know its best practice to redirect a website from http to https, instead of having many entry point to your website. When a website has been running for a long time on http and https, what are the SEO Pros and Cons of implementing a redirect from Http to Https?

[seoelevated]

If your current pages can be accessed by http and by https, and if you don't have canonicals or redirects pointing everything to one version or the other, then one very significant "con" for that approach is that you are splitting your link equity. So, if the http page has 50 inbound links, and the https has another 50, you would do better to have one page with 100 inbound links.

Another difference is how browsers show/warn about non-secure pages. As well as any ranking factor they may associate with secure. Again, in favor of redirecting http to https. The visual handling can also impact conversion rates and bounce rates, which can in turn impact ranking.

As far as cons to redirecting, one would be that you might expect a temporary disruption to rankings. There will likely be a bit of a dip, short term. Another is that you will need to remove and then be careful about accidentally adding any non-secure resources (like images) on the https pages, which will then issue a warning to visitors as well as possibly impacting ranks. There is some consensus that redirects (and canonical links) do leak a very small amount of link equity for each hop they take. So, that's another "con". But my recent experiences doing this with two sites have been that after the temporary "dip" of a couple of months, if done properly, the "pros" outweigh the "cons".

[effectdigital]

This is a very solid answer. One additional point is that without a forced structure, Google can 'catch out' your secure site linking to your insecure site. Say you have a blog and a post in the blog links to one of your pages, that link is probably created as 'absolute' in your CMS. So suddenly, when you load that blog post on HTTPS, you can see a link pointing to HTTP. Google doesn't like links pointing to insecure content, so over time the situation snowballs and you lose a lot of trust

[Zohaibkhannn]

The idea of HTTPS has always been a good one, and most leading businesses implemented it a long time ago.

However, somewhat recently, Google announced that HTTPS is a ranking factor.

Obviously, that got SEOs talking about and debating the subject.

At the time, it was a very small ranking factor, affecting less than 1% of global searches. Even now, it’s not a big factor.

However, security is something that Google takes very seriously, and it’s likely to become more important in the future.

Some SEOs jumped right on it and made the switch.

[jasongmcmahon]

There are no cons that I can think of, a simple script in a sites htaccess file is the best was to implement the redirection.

[effectdigital]

Or in NginX format which is usually faster

[FreddyKgapza]

Thanks for the answer. However, have two more questions: (1) Will implementing canonical tags limit the temporary disruption and (2) If backlinks are pointing to http will these be lost or transferred, i.e. will https pages have less equity or inherit equity of the http pages. Finally, will redirecting to https reduce the number of times Google crawls your site or will google still crawl http until all http pages in the Google cache are removed?

[effectdigital]

(1) no, if you link to an insecure page it counts against you. Since a user or search engine would have to load and visit the insecure content to find the canonical (as that's where it would be), it does not mitigate this. You'll just have to hope it doesn't end up happening too much. Canonical tags only stop content duplication, they have no impact on SEO authority merging or insecure links

(2) If the HTTPS URLs are pretty much exactly the same as their HTTP counterparts and you 301 HTTP to HTTPS, the SEO authority should flow across to HTTPS instead. Canonical tags are not proven to do what 301s do, so you may end up in a mess with those. Most sites experience a slight dip moving from HTTP to HTTPS via proper 301s, however it's not large and doesn't last long if the 301s were done well. Staying on HTTP in the long term, you will lose a lot of rankings (gradually, over time). Since you will be constantly losing, it puts your site's progress 'on hold', so the small dip from moving from HTTP to HTTPS is the 'lesser of two evils' (IMO)

(3) Both. It will reduce the number of times Google crawls HTTP, but only after pages on HTTP are dropped from Google's index / recent cache

[FreddyKgapza]

Do you know how long it takes Google to drop pages from Google's index/cache?