Should you really separate the HTTPS migration from the structural redesign of your site?

Why does Google advise separating these two migrations?

When a site migrates to HTTPS, Google needs to recrawl all URLs, update trust signals, and transfer link equity. This operation already requires a tremendous amount of indexing resources.

If at the same time you modify the architecture (new hierarchies, category merges, URL pattern changes), the engine must simultaneously understand the new structure AND process the protocol change. The crawl budget gets depleted faster, redirections become more complex, and 404 errors or redirection loops multiply.

What does this mean for processing time?

Google refers to "reinterpreting the entire site". In practical terms, the engine has to recalculate the internal PageRank, assess new navigation paths, and rebuild its semantic understanding of the relationships between pages.

On a medium-sized site (several thousand pages), this phase can last from several weeks to several months. If both migrations occur simultaneously, it becomes impossible to quickly determine which variable is causing an issue: the HTTPS transition, the new architecture, or the interaction of both.

When does this complexity become critical?

E-commerce sites with thousands of product pages, media outlets with deep archives, or multilingual platforms are particularly exposed. An institutional site with 50 static pages can absorb the shock without difficulty.

However, as soon as you surpass the threshold of 500-1000 indexed URLs with high seasonality or a changing catalog, overlapping migrations become a factor of temporary visibility loss that is difficult to anticipate.

• HTTPS migration alone: Google treats a homothetic URL change (http → https), which is a relatively predictable process.
• Structural redesign alone: You can accurately trace the impacts of the new URLs and adjust redirections.
• Both simultaneously: Multiple variables, complicated diagnostics, increased risk of configuration errors.
• Stabilization time: Can double or triple compared to a single migration, depending on the size of the site.
• Crawl budget: Used twice as intensely, which penalizes sites with low domain authority.

Does this recommendation truly reflect the on-the-ground reality?

Let's be honest: yes, but with significant sectoral nuances. On high-authority sites (DA > 60), we find that Google tolerates double migrations better. The crawl budget is sufficient to absorb the shock in a few weeks.

In contrast, on recent or niche sites with few quality backlinks, Google's recommendation is absolutely critical. I have witnessed sites lose 40% of their organic traffic for 6 months after a simultaneous HTTPS migration and redesign, simply because Google struggled to stabilize indexing.

What are the gray areas of this statement?

Google does not specify the minimum time to wait between the two migrations. Three weeks? Two months? Six months? This lack of quantified data makes the recommendation difficult to operationalize for a project manager.

Moreover, the notion of "complexity" remains vague. Can a site that moves from 200 to 180 URLs with a new simplified hierarchy migrate simultaneously to HTTPS? Google provides no tolerance thresholds. [To be verified] through your own tests if you are in an intermediate zone.

When can this rule be bypassed?

If you have a properly configured pre-production environment and have already tested all redirections, the risk decreases. Similarly, a site with a flat structure (low depth, simple linking) will cope better than a site with a deep hierarchy.

Finally, if you can force a recrawl via the Search Console and actively monitor errors during the first 15 days, you can attempt a double migration. But be careful: this requires your team to have full technical availability for several weeks.

How can you effectively organize these two migrations?

Start with the HTTPS migration, as it is the most technical but also the most predictable project. Install the SSL certificate, configure global 301 redirections (http → https), update the XML sitemap and robots.txt, then submit the new HTTPS property in the Search Console.

Wait for Google to have recrawled at least 80% of the URLs (check the index coverage report). This timeframe varies from 2 weeks for a small site to 2-3 months for a large catalog. Once this stabilization is confirmed, and only then, proceed with the structural redesign.

What mistakes should you absolutely avoid?

Never configure chain redirections (http://old-url → https://old-url → https://new-url). Google generally follows a maximum of 5 hops, but each hop dilutes the transmitted equity and slows down the crawl.

Another classic mistake: neglecting to update internal links. If your menus and footers still point to the old URLs in HTTP after the HTTPS migration, you waste crawl budget unnecessarily. Correct all hard links before switching.

How can you check that the HTTPS migration is stabilized?

Monitor three metrics in the Search Console: the number of indexed URLs (should remain stable or grow slightly), the 4xx/5xx error rate (should drop below 2%), and the average crawl time (should return to its pre-migration level).

Also, use a third-party crawler (Screaming Frog, Oncrawl) to verify that no HTTP URL remains within the internal linking. If everything is clean for at least 3 consecutive weeks, you can initiate the structural redesign.

• Audit and correct all hard URLs (menus, footers, internal links) before the HTTPS switch.
• Configure direct 301 redirections, never in chains, with a comprehensive mapping from the old to the new URLs.
• Submit the new HTTPS sitemap in the Search Console and monitor the coverage report daily.
• Wait for at least 80% of URLs to be recrawled and for performance metrics (traffic, rankings) to stabilize.
• Document every step in a migration journal to trace causes in case of future issues.
• Prepare a technical rollback plan (full backup, rollback procedure) before any critical manipulation.