Should we still use rel=next and rel=previous tags for pagination?

Why is Google dropping these pagination tags?

The rel=next and rel=previous tags were introduced to help search engines understand the relationship between pages of a paginated series. Google used them for years to consolidate SEO signals and avoid diluting PageRank over dozens of product or category pages.

However, crawling and content understanding systems have evolved. Current algorithms automatically detect paginated structure by analyzing internal links, URL patterns, HTML structure, and contextual signals. The tag becomes redundant — or even counterproductive if poorly implemented.

What happens to pagination in Google indexing?

Google now treats each paginated page as a standalone page with its own internal links. No more artificial signal consolidation. Each pagination page can theoretically rank for its own terms, even though in practice pages 2, 3, 4… rarely have strong ranking potential.

In practice, Google crawls page 1, follows links to page 2, then page 3, and so on. There is no longer special handling for these series. It’s the internal navigation logic that takes precedence: if your pagination links are clear, Google will follow the thread without issue.

Do these tags still have any usefulness?

For Google, no. For accessibility, potentially. Some screen readers and assistive technologies use rel=next\/prev to improve navigation for visually impaired users. If your CMS natively generates these tags and you have accessibility concerns, you are not forced to remove them.

But don’t count on them for SEO. And if they are poorly implemented — infinite loops, broken links, inconsistencies — they won’t bring any benefits anyway. Google simply ignores them, whether they are correct or not.

• Google no longer considers the rel=next and rel=previous tags for indexing or ranking
• Paginated pages are treated as independent pages connected by standard internal links
• You can remove them without negative SEO impact — or keep them for accessibility if necessary
• Detection of pagination relies on the automatic analysis of URL patterns and internal linking
• No need for special tags: a clean crawl and consistent links are sufficient

Is this statement consistent with field observations?

Yes and no. On well-structured sites with clean navigation, removing these tags has caused no drama. Crawls continue, indexing remains stable, and rankings don’t change. This aligns with what Mueller says: Google manages just fine on its own.

However, on sites with complex pagination — multiple facets, dynamic filters, chaotic URLs — I've seen situations where removing the tags has worsened crawl budget dilution. [To verify]: does Google really have the means to decode everything across all types of architectures, or does it favor simple structures and ignore edge cases?

What consequences are there for e-commerce sites with heavy pagination?

This is where it gets tricky. A site with 50,000 products and 20 paginated categories across 200 pages each means thousands of URLs to crawl. Previously, rel=next\/prev helped Google understand that these were linked series and prioritize the crawl. Now, Google decides on its own — and there's no guarantee it crawls all your pages 15, 23, 47…

The real risk is the discoverability of products at the end of pagination. If Google only crawls the first 5 pages, some products become invisible. The solution: improve internal linking, use XML sitemaps, and ensure every product is accessible in less than 3 clicks from the homepage. Not easy to scale.

Should we actually remove these tags or leave them in place?

My opinion? If they are already there and correctly implemented, leave them. They do no harm — Google ignores them, that’s all. Removing functional code for no tangible SEO benefit is a waste of time. However, if you are launching a new site or revamping your template, there’s no need to code them.

And importantly, don’t rely on them as a consolidation solution. If you want to avoid PageRank dilution on pagination, prefer targeted canonicals (all paginated pages pointing to page 1, or each page self-canonical according to your goal), noindex on pages >5, or implementing a "Load More" in JS to limit indexable URLs.

What should be done concretely with the existing pagination?

First step: audit your crawl logs. Ensure that Google is crawling all significant paginated pages — or at least the first pages of each series. If you see that Googlebot consistently stops at page 3, your crawl budget is either saturated or your internal links are not strong enough.

Next, ensure that each paginated page has identifiable unique content. Google needs to see a difference between page 1 and page 2 — not just a change of products in an identical grid. Add contextual elements: number of results, active filters, dynamic breadcrumbs. This helps the algorithm understand the structure.

What alternatives to rel=next\/prev exist for optimizing pagination?

If you want to consolidate SEO juice on page 1, use canonicals: all pages 2, 3, 4… point their canonical to page 1. Be careful: this means that only page 1 will be indexed. Products at the end of pagination must then be accessible through other paths (cross categories, enhanced internal linking).

Another option: progressive noindex. Allow indexing for pages 1 to 5, then noindex beyond that. This limits dilution while keeping a safety net for less accessible products. Alternatively, switch to an infinite "Load More" system in JavaScript that generates only one indexable URL — but make sure your JS is crawlable.

How can you verify that Google understands your pagination well?

Check in Search Console which paginated pages are indexed and which are receiving impressions. If you see that only page 1 ranks and pages 2+ generate no traffic, that’s normal — but check that your important products are not stuck on page 8.

Also analyze the coverage reports: if you have thousands of "Excluded" pages marked as "Crawled, not indexed", it means Google visits your pagination but chooses not to index it. Either it's intentional (noindex), or it's a signal of perceived low quality. In this case, enhance the content of those pages or block them in robots.txt to save crawl budget.

• Audit crawl logs to ensure Google visits significant paginated pages
• Ensure that each paginated page has differentiating content (breadcrumbs, filters, result counter)
• Choose a consolidation strategy: canonicals pointing to page 1, progressive noindex, or infinite Load More
• Check in Search Console which paginated pages are indexed and generating traffic
• Enhance internal linking so that each product is accessible in less than 3 clicks from the homepage
• Remove rel=next\/prev tags only if they are poorly implemented or cause errors — otherwise, leaving them does not harm
  The removal of rel=next\/prev tags by Google shifts the responsibility for managing pagination onto site architecture and internal linking. In practical terms, this requires more detailed optimization work: crawl budget, canonicals, click depth, URL structure. If your site has thousands of paginated pages and you're unsure how to handle these levers, it may be worthwhile to engage a specialized SEO agency to audit your architecture and establish a pagination strategy suited to your business context.