The meaning of 'indexed' in Google Search Console - What about supplemental index?

[FranticFish]

First post in a while (out of semi-retirement), playing catch up knowledge-wise.

I'm doing an audit on a 'timewarp' site from the 90s and I'm trying to reconcile what I'm seeing in Analytics, Search Console and Google via search operators.

The site in question has over 900 product page urls in GSC marked as valid, with the explanation 'these pages have been successfully indexed'. Yet when I look in Analytics I never see more than 300 of them the Landing Pages report each month. Furthermore, when I use the site: query for pages of this type, although the initial count is close to 1000, when you click through it changes to c300. Historically, this was an indicator of main vs supplemental index. However I'm aware that this concept might be deprecated. And I'm also aware that search operators such as site: are also increasingly deprecated.

Would very much welcome pointers / resources on:
- up to date concepts of 'indexing' and what it means regarding your visibility and potential visibility, and
- what significance I should assign to the differences I'm seeing in the numbers

[goodroi]

Google Search Console is not reliable but it is the best we have. Over the last few years (and as recently as a few months ago if I remember correctly) Google has made tweaks to its reporting of indexed pages. I personally try not to over analyze this number. I focus more attention on landing pages generating traffic. The site: query results tend to be even more Google guesses than the GSC data.

Going forward I would worry less about main index vs supplemental and worry more about desktop performance vs mobile performance. For smaller sites (like 5k & under) I prefer to focus on landing pages generating traffic. Growing that number by improving internal linking and social media outreach is usually all that is needed of course YMMV. Google seems to be increasing the value of speed & usability. They are planning a big update for 2021 based on the core web vital reports in GSC. So make sure your technical fundamentals are in good shape. Faster loading pages can really help the very large sites increase their index presence.

[FranticFish]

Thanks goodroi.

You mention landing page traffic generation and that's what's primarily in my mind here: c300 landing pages, c300 actual indexed urls in Google vs an original number of 1000 via site: and 900 in GSC.

What I'm really trying to get at here is this: does the concept of a supplemental index still exist, or has it been replaced by something else?

[goodroi]

IMHO The basic concept of urls being placed into different value buckets (like main vs supplemental vs ignored) still exists. The supplemental index that existed 15 years ago doesn't exist anymore or at least not the way that it was years ago. The whole indexing & valuation assessment process has just become more complicated as Google added ingredients/requirements to their secret ranking formula.

[not2easy]

All site structures are not created equal. I have hesitated to comment because CMS use and its effect on this scenario could explain it, but lacking that information I'd suggest viewing the overall sitemap structure to see whether it is listing the same content at various URLs. This is typical for different CMS sites whether is is a merchant or shopping site or a WP site. If so and if there exists 1000 URLs and 300 are listed as indexed, IF this is using a CMS then that would be fairly normal. IF it uses no CMS and each URL presents unique and related content then that is different. Without that basic information I'd be guessing.

[FranticFish]

Thanks guys

It is a static HTML site, which will be moved into WP.

Thin / repetitive content is definitely an issue we've picked up during the audit: indeed, the deeper we dig, the more surprised we are that the site has any fortunes, let alone failing fortunes. It dominated its niche ten years ago but has been in a slow death situation since then.