What does Google say about SEO? /
Quick SEO Quiz

Test your SEO knowledge in 5 questions

Less than a minute. Find out how much you really know about Google search.

🕒 ~1 min 🎯 5 questions

Official statement

The rel 'next' and 'prev' tags should be in the HTML header to indicate related page sets. Avoid massive navigation sets that can trap the crawler.
62:57
🎥 Source video

Extracted from a Google Search Central video

⏱ 1h06 💬 EN 📅 24/03/2016 ✂ 20 statements
Watch on YouTube (62:57) →
Other statements from this video 19
  1. 2:17 Comment empêcher les URLs de login de polluer vos sitelinks dans Google ?
  2. 6:49 Pourquoi Google ignore-t-il parfois vos balises canonical ?
  3. 8:46 Les liens vers vos pages AMP sont-ils vraiment comptabilisés vers votre version canonique ?
  4. 9:43 Pourquoi les URLs avec session ID mettent-elles jusqu'à un an à disparaître de l'index ?
  5. 10:33 Faut-il vraiment utiliser rel=canonical vers le bureau pour vos pages mobiles séparées ?
  6. 11:59 Hreflang et ciblage géographique : confondez-vous encore langue et région ?
  7. 14:52 Désactiver le géociblage dans Search Console : erreur tactique ou stratégie gagnante ?
  8. 17:38 La personnalisation du contenu selon les données démographiques nuit-elle au crawl Google ?
  9. 22:14 Pourquoi Google met-il jusqu'à un an à traiter toutes les redirections après une migration de domaine ?
  10. 26:31 Faut-il vraiment s'inquiéter des erreurs 'not-followed' dans Search Console ?
  11. 29:30 La balise meta NOODP doit-elle encore être respectée par Google ?
  12. 31:57 Pourquoi Google ignore-t-il des URLs présentes dans votre sitemap XML ?
  13. 43:38 Le support If-Modified-Since est-il vraiment universel sur tous les serveurs ?
  14. 46:53 Faut-il vraiment supprimer le JSON-LD des pages en NOINDEX ?
  15. 55:41 Pourquoi l'indexation des images SVG prend-elle plus de temps que celle des pages Web ?
  16. 62:36 Faut-il vraiment indexer vos pages de recherche interne et de tags ?
  17. 71:08 L'outil de soumission d'URL accélère-t-il vraiment le classement de vos pages ?
  18. 78:26 Faut-il vraiment fusionner vos microsites locaux pour éviter la cannibalisation SEO ?
  19. 83:59 Comment Google traite-t-il vraiment les sites piratés dans ses résultats de recherche ?
📅
Official statement from (10 years ago)
TL;DR

Google stopped using rel='next' and rel='prev' tags for pagination since March 2019. The official recommendation to avoid massive sets that can trap the crawler remains valid, but these attributes no longer have any direct impact on crawling or indexing. SEO practitioners must rethink their pagination strategy without relying on these now-obsolete tags for Google, even though they still hold marginal utility for other search engines.

What you need to understand

What does the abandonment of rel='next' and 'prev' really mean?

In March 2019, Google officially announced that it no longer considers the rel='next' and rel='prev' tags for managing pagination. These attributes, once recommended to indicate sequences of pages (categories, product listings, blog archives), no longer play any role in crawling, indexing, or signal consolidation decisions.

John Mueller's statement in this context recalls the old best practices: placing these tags in the <head> HTML, avoiding overly long chains that scatter crawl budget. But one must be clear: these guidelines are now theoretical for Google, although they remain valid for Bing, Yandex, or other crawlers that still honor them.

Why did Google abandon these tags?

Google found that most implementations were incorrect or inconsistent, and the search engine managed pagination better on its own by following traditional internal links. Usage signals (click-through rates, navigation depth) and the site's structure are sufficient to understand that a series of pages forms a logical set.

The abandonment of rel='next'/'prev' is part of a gradual simplification of HTML guidelines: Google favors behavioral analysis and internal linking quality over often poorly filled explicit metadata. This aligns with the removal of other signals such as the rel='author' attribute or the relative deprecation of meta keywords.

Do massive sets still trap the crawler?

Yes, that is the only point that remains valid regardless of the tags. A pagination of 500 pages with no distinctive value or unique content scatters the crawl budget and dilutes link equity (internal PageRank). Google has to choose which pages to explore first: if each paginated page offers nearly identical content, the crawler may stall on these URLs at the expense of strategic pages.

The solution is no longer through rel='next'/'prev', but through a clear architecture: limit the number of paginated pages exposed to crawling, use URL parameters tracked via Search Console, provide filters or alternative views that segment content in a meaningful way. The problem remains the same, only the remedy has changed.

  • Rel='next' and 'prev' have no effect on Google since March 2019, even if technically valid in HTML5.
  • Google manages pagination autonomously by following internal links and analyzing navigation patterns.
  • Overly long pagination chains remain detrimental to crawl budget, regardless of the tags.
  • Bing, Yandex, and other search engines continue to interpret these attributes: do not remove them if you aim for cross-engine traffic.
  • The site structure and internal linking quality are now the primary levers to optimize pagination.

SEO Expert opinion

Does this statement really reflect observed practices in the field?

Absolutely. Since the official announcement in 2019, no measurable correlation exists between the presence of rel='next'/'prev' and indexing or ranking performance on Google. A/B tests conducted on e-commerce sites with heavy pagination show that removing these tags does not lead to a drop in crawling, loss of visibility, or different signal consolidation.

However, classic structural optimizations still have a significant impact: reduce the number of clicks to deep pages, enrich each paginated page with unique content (category descriptions, editorial blocks), avoid URL duplications via canonicalization or robots.txt. These are the levers that determine crawl quality, not outdated metadata.

Should you remove these tags from your code?

Not necessarily. Bing continues to use rel='next' and 'prev' to understand pagination, and if your site targets markets where Bing, Yandex, or Baidu hold significant shares, maintaining these tags remains relevant. They do not harm; they are simply ignored by Google.

On the other hand, do not waste time fixing awkward implementations if your traffic comes exclusively from Google. Focus your development resources on proven ROI projects: improve the Core Web Vitals of paginated pages, refine the internal linking, segment pagination URLs through parameters tracked in Search Console. [To be verified]: Some practitioners report that Google still uses these tags for edge cases (pagination on separate subdomains, complex multilingual sites), but no official documentation confirms this.

What frequent mistakes are still observed?

The first pitfall: confusing rel='next'/'prev' with rel='canonical'. Some webmasters believe that a canonical tag pointing to page 1 effectively replaces rel='next'/'prev'. Mistake: canonical consolidates all paginated content into a single URL, which can deindex pages 2, 3, etc., resulting in the loss of useful content from the index. If each paginated page carries distinct content, it must remain indexable with its own self-referential canonical.

The second classic error: pagination without providing a 'View All' option or alternative landing page. Google favors pages that offer a complete response to search intent. If your pagination artificially segments content that could be presented on a single page (with well-implemented lazy-load or infinite scroll), you dilute your ranking chances. User experience is paramount: poorly justified pagination indirectly penalizes SEO through engagement metrics.

Practical impact and recommendations

What should you concretely do on an existing site?

Pagination audit: identify all paginated URLs indexed via Search Console (filter 'page=' or similar patterns). Check if these pages generate organic traffic or if they are just passing points. If pages 2+ never convert and capture few clicks, consider deindexing them (noindex, robots.txt) or consolidating them via canonical to page 1, assessing the impact on content access.

Optimizing internal linking: reduce the click depth to strategic pages. Use filters, faceted menus, or 'Featured Products' blocks on page 1 to provide shortcuts to key elements. Each paginated page should offer distinctive value: enriched category description, unique sorting or filtering, complementary editorial content.

What mistakes should you absolutely avoid?

Do not rely on rel='next'/'prev' to communicate with Google. If your SEO strategy still depends on these tags to manage indexing or signal consolidation, it is outdated. Replace this approach with a clear architecture, consistent canonicals, and managing URL parameters in Search Console (the 'Exploration > URL Parameters' section has disappeared but replaced by canonicalization rules and pattern tracking).

Also avoid pagination without UX rationale. If an infinite scroll or 'View All' option improves the experience without degrading performance (Core Web Vitals), prioritize this option. Google crawls modern JavaScript: a well-implemented infinite scroll with server-side rendering or SSR hydration no longer poses indexing issues, contrary to common beliefs.

How can you verify the compliance of your pagination?

Use Google Search Console to track indexed paginated URLs and their performance. Identify orphan pages (indexed but without internal links), inconsistent canonicals, or paginated pages blocked by robots.txt while carrying useful content. The 'Coverage' report identifies indexing errors related to pagination.

Test the mobile rendering of your paginated pages using the URL inspection tool: check that links to next/previous pages are crawlable, that content loads without timeout, and that Core Web Vitals remain in the green. Slow or unstable pagination on mobile indirectly penalizes ranking through user experience signals.

  • Remove rel='next'/'prev' if your traffic comes solely from Google, or keep them for compatibility with Bing/Yandex.
  • Audit indexed paginated URLs in Search Console and evaluate their contribution to organic traffic.
  • Reduce the click depth to strategic pages through optimized internal linking and relevant filters.
  • Enrich each paginated page with unique content (descriptions, editorial blocks) to justify its indexing.
  • Test mobile rendering and Core Web Vitals of paginated pages to ensure a smooth experience.
  • Manage pagination URL parameters through consistent canonicals and crawl rules in Search Console.
SEO pagination has shifted from a logic of explicit metadata (rel='next'/'prev') to a structural and behavioral optimization. Google decides alone which pages to crawl and index, based on internal linking, perceived content value, and usage signals. Your priority: architect pagination for the user, reduce click depth, and measure the impact via Search Console. These technical optimizations can prove complex to orchestrate on high-volume sites: engaging a specialized SEO agency allows for a thorough pagination audit, a prioritized roadmap, and support in implementing fixes (canonicals, linking, URL parameters) without risking deindexation or loss of traffic.

❓ Frequently Asked Questions

Google utilise-t-il encore rel='next' et rel='prev' en 2025 ?
Non. Google a officiellement cessé d'utiliser ces balises en mars 2019. Elles sont ignorées par le moteur, même si techniquement valides en HTML5.
Dois-je supprimer ces balises de mon code si elles y sont déjà ?
Pas obligatoirement. Elles ne nuisent pas et restent utiles pour Bing, Yandex ou d'autres crawlers. Supprimez-les uniquement si elles complexifient votre maintenance sans bénéfice multi-moteur.
Comment Google gère-t-il la pagination sans ces balises ?
Google suit les liens internes classiques (Suivant, Précédent, numéros de page) et analyse les patterns de navigation pour comprendre qu'une série de pages forme un ensemble logique. Les signaux d'usage et la structure du site suffisent.
Faut-il utiliser rel='canonical' pour consolider les pages paginées ?
Uniquement si le contenu paginé est strictement dupliqué. Si chaque page porte du contenu distinct (produits différents, articles uniques), chaque page doit avoir son propre canonical auto-référent pour rester indexable.
Une pagination trop longue pénalise-t-elle encore le SEO ?
Oui. Une chaîne de 500 pages quasi-identiques disperse le crawl budget et dilue l'équité de lien, indépendamment des balises. Limitez le nombre de pages exposées, enrichissez le contenu de chaque page, et optimisez le maillage interne.
🏷 Related Topics
Domain Age & History Crawl & Indexing Pagination & Structure

🎥 From the same video 19

Other SEO insights extracted from this same Google Search Central video · duration 1h06 · published on 24/03/2016

🎥 Watch the full video on YouTube →

Related statements

💬 Comments (0)

Be the first to comment.

2000 characters remaining
🔔

Get real-time analysis of the latest Google SEO declarations

Be the first to know every time a new official Google statement drops — with full expert analysis.

No spam. Unsubscribe in one click.