Does the target="_blank" attribute affect SEO rankings?

Why does this question keep coming up among SEOs?

The confusion surrounding the target="_blank" attribute stems from a persistent belief: altering a link's behavior could change how Google understands or values it. Some practitioners believe that opening an external link in a new tab signals to Google a desire to retain the user, which could alter the transmission of link juice.

This hypothesis has never been validated by solid field data. It relies on a mix-up between UX signals and ranking signals. Google analyzes the HTML content of a link — its href, anchor text, and semantic context — not how the user chooses to open it in their browser.

What does Google really consider in a link?

To evaluate a link, Google's algorithms scrutinize several parameters: the destination URL, anchor text, the link’s position on the page, the surrounding semantic context, and the presence or absence of attributes like nofollow or sponsored. These elements determine whether the link transmits authority, whether it is crawled, and what thematic relevance it carries.

The target attribute, whether set to _blank, _self or any other value, does not factor into this equation. It is a navigation instruction intended for the user's browser, not the search engine. Google parses the HTML, follows the links, and completely ignores this parameter, which provides no information about the quality or nature of the linked resource.

Does this statement change anything about best practices?

No, it merely clarifies a non-issue. SEOs who have always chosen their link-opening strategy based on user experience should change nothing. Those who applied arbitrary rules — "always open external links in a new tab" or "never use target=_blank to keep the juice" — can now focus on what really matters.

The only valid consideration remains UX: opening an external resource in a new tab can enhance retention rates on your site, but it may also annoy some users who prefer to manage their tabs themselves. It's an editorial judgment, nothing more.

• The target="_blank" attribute does not affect crawling, PageRank, or ranking.
• Google does not read this attribute to evaluate the quality or nature of a link.
• The choice to open a link in a new tab is exclusively about user experience.
• No SEO optimization arises from this parameter — focus your efforts elsewhere.
• The attributes rel="nofollow", rel="sponsored", or rel="ugc" remain the only link modifiers with SEO impact.

Is this statement consistent with field observations?

Absolutely. No correlation study or documented A/B test has ever shown any difference in SEO performance related to the use of target="_blank". Sites that open all their external links in a new tab do not rank better or worse than those that open them in the same tab. Any observed performance variations are always attributable to other factors: content quality, link profile, UX signals, architecture.

What Mueller confirms here is that Google does not attempt to interpret editorial intent through this type of HTML attribute. The engine focuses on much richer and less ambiguous signals. A link remains a link, no matter which window it opens in.

Are there cases where this rule could be nuanced?

In theory, if the massive use of target="_blank" degrades behavioral metrics (time on site, pages per session, bounce rate), it could indirectly affect SEO. But it would not be the attribute itself that poses a problem — it would be the UX consequences of your editorial choice. Google does not penalize target="_blank"; it could potentially detect that your users are leaving your site quickly because they are frustrated.

In practice, this effect remains marginal and hard to isolate. Behavioral metrics are weak and noisy ranking signals, and no one has ever proven that a change in target attribute was sufficient to shift the curves. [To be verified]: no public data allows us to claim that Google uses external link click behavior as a quality signal. If it does, the impact remains infinitesimal in any case.

Should we totally ignore this parameter?

No, but for reasons unrelated to SEO. The target="_blank" attribute should be accompanied by rel="noopener noreferrer" for security reasons (to prevent tabnabbing attacks) and performance reasons (to avoid blocking the original page by the new process). It is a front-end development reflex, not an SEO optimization.

Moreover, accessibility guidelines suggest informing the user when a link opens in a new tab, especially for those using assistive technologies. Adding a text mention or an icon improves UX, but again, there is no direct SEO impact — only a better experience that can indirectly enhance engagement signals.

What should you concretely do on your sites?

Nothing specific if your current strategy is coherent. Review your editorial guidelines and ensure they are based on UX criteria, not SEO fantasies. For example: "Open links to complementary external resources in a new tab to facilitate comparison" is a valid choice. "Open all external links in a new tab to keep SEO juice" is superstition to abandon.

If you have developed scripts or CMS rules that systematically enforce target="_blank" out of fear of losing PageRank, you can simplify or remove them. The important thing is that each link meets a clear intent: keep the user on a browsing path, offer them an additional resource, or redirect them to a transactional page. This intent should guide the choice, not a non-existent SEO rule.

What mistakes should you absolutely avoid?

Do not confuse target="_blank" with rel attributes, which do have real SEO impact. An external link with target="_blank" without rel="nofollow" will always transmit PageRank. Conversely, a link set to _self with rel="nofollow" transmits nothing, even if it opens in the same tab. These are two completely independent dimensions.

Avoid also the unnecessary multiplication of new tab openings without editorial reason. This can fragment navigation and frustrate users, especially on mobile, where tab management is less smooth. Misusing target="_blank" will not directly harm your SEO but could degrade your UX signals — and that can have indirect consequences.

How do you check if your link strategy is optimal?

Audit your strategic pages with a crawler like Screaming Frog or Oncrawl. List all links with target="_blank" and ensure they are accompanied by rel="noopener noreferrer" for security. Then, examine outgoing links to third-party sites: are they dofollow or nofollow? This distinction matters for SEO, not the opening method.

Also, analyze your Analytics metrics: do you observe behavioral differences (time on site, page views) between pages that open many links in a new tab and those that do not? If so, test variations. But do not expect to see ranking variations — that will be UX optimization, not pure SEO.

• Ensure every link with target="_blank" includes rel="noopener noreferrer" for security.
• Review your editorial guidelines to base them on UX criteria, not SEO.
• Audit your external links to clearly distinguish dofollow and nofollow, the only attributes with SEO impact.
• Test the user experience on mobile: is opening in a new tab relevant or annoying?
• Eliminate scripts that force target="_blank" out of fear of "losing juice" — this belief has no basis.
• Document your editorial choices to maintain consistency between writers and developers.