What it is.
This starts from 340 orphan pages on one archive, which is the kind of problem per-post linking cannot reach.
Across the B2B SaaS archives we rebuild, 40 to 50% of high-impact linking opportunities are orphan repairs, another 25 to 30% are topic cluster work, and the remaining 20 to 30% are anchor diversity corrections.
New-post link insertion accounts for under 5% of the lift we measure after a rebuild, which is the finding that redirects the effort.
What you get.
- A four-part site audit: sitemap reconciliation, link graph, anchor distribution, cluster integrity
- Where the opportunities sit, at 40 to 50% orphan repairs and 25 to 30% cluster repairs
- Why template-level repairs beat per-page edits, with about 70% of breaks templatable
- The anchor concentration threshold we flag, at 25% of inbound anchor text to one destination
- Anchor fatigue on 10 to 15% of high-traffic destinations, and generic anchor waste on 25 to 35%
- One archive rebuild walked through, and how the pipeline handles CMS limits
Read it at the source.
Read the guide
Where is the lift concentrated?
Can I do this post by post?
Does internal linking still matter?
Can internal linking be automated?
Should you add links to new posts or repair the archive?
How much of one anchor is too much?