Should you still worry about rel='prev' and rel='next' for pagination?

Why is Google abandoning these pagination tags?

Google has always had an ambiguous relationship with pagination. The rel='prev' and rel='next' tags were introduced to help the engine understand the structure of a series of paginated pages — typically product listings, blog archives, and internal search results.

The problem? These tags never really functioned as intended. They were supposed to signal to Google that a series of pages formed a coherent set, thereby avoiding duplication and the dilution of PageRank. But in reality, their impact was unclear — and Google implicitly admits this by abandoning them.

What does this removal actually mean for indexing?

Google claims to be able to understand paginated content without these signals. In other words, the algorithm now relies solely on analyzing the content, the HTML structure, and internal links to deduce that a series of pages constitutes pagination.

This statement remains deliberately vague. Google does not specify how it detects pagination or what signals it uses instead. One can assume it relies on recurring patterns: visible page numbers, “Next” and “Previous” buttons, URL parameters like ?page=2 or /page/2/.

Were the tags really useful before this announcement?

Let’s be honest: even before this official abandonment, the actual utility of rel='prev' and rel='next' was questionable. Many sites never implemented these tags and have fared very well in terms of indexing and ranking.

In my experience, these tags often caused more problems than they solved — implementation errors, poorly managed pagination loops, accidental crawl dilution. Google’s abandonment simply formalizes a reality: these tags were never a critical factor.

• Google no longer supports rel='prev' and rel='next' tags at all
• The engine claims to understand pagination without these signals
• No urgent action required: neither removal nor addition of these tags
• The pagination structure remains important, but via other signals (links, URLs, content)
• The actual impact of these tags was already marginal before the announcement

Is this statement consistent with field observations?

Absolutely. I have audited dozens of e-commerce sites in recent years — some with perfectly implemented rel='prev'/next', others without. The difference in indexing or SEO performance was consistently negligible.

Google probably realized that these tags generated more confusion than added value. Implementation errors were common: broken chains, orphan pages, infinite loops. The abandonment of these tags simplifies the life of SEOs — and probably Google’s as well.

What are the real risks if we actively remove these tags?

No major risk, but [To be confirmed] — there’s no urgency to remove them. If they are in place and functional, they do no harm. If they are poorly implemented, correcting or removing them could even improve the situation.

The real point of focus is the pagination structure itself. Ensure that your paginated pages remain crawlable via standard HTML links, not just through JavaScript. Google must be able to follow the pagination chain without relying on specific tags.

Should we completely rethink our pagination strategy?

Not necessarily. Pagination remains a complex SEO topic — and the abandonment of these tags doesn’t change the fundamentals. What truly matters: clean internal links, a coherent URL structure, and optimized crawl budget.

For large sites with thousands of paginated pages, the strategic question remains the same: should all pagination pages be indexed or prioritize a “View All” page? Google provides no clear answer on this — and this statement adds nothing new on that front.

What should you do if these tags are already in place?

Nothing urgent. Google ignores them now, but their presence doesn’t penalize your site. If they are properly implemented, you can leave them in place — they cause no damage.

However, if you notice errors related to these tags in Google Search Console (broken pagination chains, loops, inconsistencies), now is the time to remove them cleanly. Take this opportunity to ensure your pagination remains accessible via standard HTML links.

How can you ensure Google understands pagination well without these tags?

The key is to make your pagination structure obvious to a crawler. Use classic internal links (Next, Previous buttons, page numbers) — not just JavaScript that dynamically loads content.

Check in Search Console that all your important pagination pages are indexed. If some pagination pages disappear from the index after removing the tags, it’s a signal that your internal linking structure is insufficient.

What mistakes should be avoided when redesigning pagination?

The classic mistake: switching to a pure infinite scroll system without HTML fallback. Google can crawl content loaded with JavaScript, but it’s less reliable than a good old HTML link. Always plan for a fallback solution.

Another trap: inconsistent URL parameters. If your pagination uses ?page=2 sometimes, &p=2 other times, and /page/2/ at others, Google may fail to understand the logic. Unify your URL structure.

• Ensure that pagination pages are crawlable via HTML links
• Ensure that pagination URLs follow a coherent structure
• Check in Search Console the indexing of paginated pages
• Remove rel='prev'/next' tags only if they generate errors
• Test client-side rendering with Google’s URL inspection tool
• Avoid infinite scroll without HTML fallback for critical content