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 rel=prev tags are useful for paginated content, but they are not always taken into account if the pages are set to noindex.
20:00
🎥 Source video

Extracted from a Google Search Central video

⏱ 1h13 💬 EN 📅 26/06/2017 ✂ 26 statements
Watch on YouTube (20:00) →
✂ Other statements from this video 25 ▾
  1. 4:51 Why doesn't Google guarantee an increase in featured snippets?
  2. 5:48 How does Googlebot actually calculate your crawl budget?
  3. 8:04 Does Google really handle duplicate content when HTTP and HTTPS don't redirect?
  4. 8:45 Is JavaScript really blowing your crawl budget?
  5. 10:26 Does Google really use your meta descriptions in search snippets?
  6. 12:10 Why do rel='next' and rel='prev' tags fail on noindex pages?
  7. 12:16 Can you really combine rel=next/prev and noindex without sacrificing your crawl budget?
  8. 13:54 Does Google really merge HTTP and HTTPS into a single canonical URL?
  9. 14:20 Are links in dropdown menus really crawled by Google?
  10. 14:20 Are Dropdown Menus Actually Crawled Like Any Other Internal Link?
  11. 15:06 Are site-wide links really safe for your SEO?
  12. 15:11 Do site-wide links really penalize your SEO?
  13. 16:06 Is it really necessary to optimize your meta descriptions if Google rewrites them?
  14. 16:16 Relative or absolute internal links: Do they really affect SEO?
  15. 16:34 Do relative links hurt SEO compared to absolute links?
  16. 17:31 Do low-quality featured snippets expose a flaw in Google's algorithms?
  17. 24:11 Will featured snippets really expand beyond just definitions?
  18. 28:12 Does Google manually correct search results based on internal reports?
  19. 28:16 Are rich cards truly deployed equally across all countries?
  20. 30:40 Does Google really index the content of your iframes?
  21. 35:15 Is your crawl budget leaking due to unnecessary URLs?
  22. 38:04 Should you really create a separate URL for each product filter in e-commerce?
  23. 48:11 What happens if your robots.txt file is blocked or inaccessible?
  24. 48:27 Does Google really index JavaScript, or should you be cautious about it?
  25. 52:57 Does Google really index JavaScript just like any HTML page?
📅
Official statement from (9 years ago)
TL;DR

Google acknowledges the usefulness of rel=next and rel=prev tags for paginated content but specifies that their consideration is not guaranteed if the pages have a noindex directive. Specifically, a signal conflict arises: on one hand you indicate a pagination structure, while on the other you request not to index. To avoid inconsistencies, you must choose between full indexing of the paginated series or a complete abandonment of these relational tags.

What you need to understand

Why does this statement illuminate a common blind spot?

The rel=next and rel=prev tags were historically used to signal to Google that a series of pages forms a coherent set, like pages 1, 2, 3 of a product category. The initial idea: concentrate ranking signals on the first page or on a canonical version, avoid spreading PageRank, and prevent duplicate content.

However, since March 2019, Google officially announced it no longer uses these tags for indexing consolidation. They remain theoretically useful for understanding site structure but have no direct impact on ranking. Mueller's comment adds another layer: if you place a noindex on paginated pages, Google often completely ignores these relational attributes.

What is the technical problem behind this signal conflict?

The noindex directive explicitly instructs Google not to include a page in its index. The rel=next/prev tags, on the other hand, structure a set of pages that are supposed to be indexable. When both coexist, Google receives contradictory instructions: index this series… but do not index it.

In this case, the noindex directive prevails systemically. Google cannot "understand" the structure of a pagination when its components are excluded from its index. The crawler can still discover the URLs via links, but it will not process the grouping signals you intended to establish.

In what scenarios does this situation concretely occur?

Some e-commerce or editorial sites apply a noindex on pages 2, 3, 4… to concentrate SEO value on page 1. They simultaneously add rel=next/prev, thinking they are guiding Google to the canonical version. This is a legacy of old best practices, now obsolete.

Other configurations mix canonical + noindex + rel=prev/next, creating a stack of directives that Google drastically simplifies: it ignores everything except the noindex. The risk: losing potentially useful crawl signals, with no real gain since the relational tags have been largely useless since 2019.

  • The rel=next and rel=prev tags no longer directly influence indexing or ranking since 2019.
  • A noindex directive effectively cancels any attempt to structure via these attributes.
  • The signal conflict generates an interpretative uncertainty on the search engine side, with Google always favoring the most restrictive directive.
  • If you want to maintain a readable pagination structure, all pages of the series must remain indexable.
  • Removing rel=next/prev from noindex pages changes nothing: they are already ignored for consolidation.

SEO Expert opinion

Is this statement consistent with real-world observations?

Yes, absolutely. Since the March 2019 announcement confirming the abandonment of rel=next/prev as an indexing signal, tests show that Google treats each pagination page as an independent entity. Adding a noindex to pages 2+ simply excludes them, with the relational tags having no residual influence.

In practice, many sites continue to use rel=next/prev out of habit or because WordPress plugins generate them automatically. But crawl budget data and indexing rates show that these tags do not trigger any particular processing on the Googlebot side. The noindex remains the deciding factor, while rel=prev/next becomes just markup noise.

What nuances should be added to this rule?

Mueller specifies "not always taken into account," suggesting that in some marginal cases, Google could still interpret these tags even in the presence of noindex. But no public data supports this scenario. [To be verified]: it's impossible to know if this concerns legacy situations, transitional bugs, or undocumented exceptions.

Furthermore, if you use rel=canonical instead of noindex, the situation differs slightly. A canonical points to a preferred version while allowing indexing of the source page. But even then, rel=next/prev provides no concrete benefit: Google independently determines which page to show in the SERPs without relying on these attributes since 2019. In short, their real utility is virtually nil.

In what cases does this rule not apply at all?

If all your paginated pages remain indexable (no noindex, no canonical to page 1), the rel=next/prev tags do not harm… but they no longer help either. Google crawls and indexes each page independently, evaluating its own content, backlinks, and user engagement.

Some argue that these tags still facilitate understanding of the structure for third-party engines or screen readers. This argument is valid in terms of accessibility but beyond the strict SEO perimeter. For Google, it's been a ignored signal for a long time. If you maintain rel=next/prev, do it for legacy compatibility or internal governance reasons, not for a ranking gain.

Practical impact and recommendations

What should be done practically on a paginated site?

First, audit existing directives. Use a crawler (Screaming Frog, OnCrawl, Botify) to list all pages featuring both rel=next/prev and noindex. If you find this combination, you already know that the relational tags are ignored: it's best to remove them to clarify the markup.

Next, choose a clear strategy. Either you index all pagination pages (useful if each page contains unique content, advanced filters, or long-tail keywords), or you concentrate indexing on page 1 via canonical or noindex on the following pages. In the latter case, rel=next/prev becomes redundant: remove them from the code.

What mistakes should be avoided during migration or cleanup?

Never allow noindex + canonical + rel=prev/next to coexist on the same page. This stack of directives generates confusion, slows down Googlebot’s interpretation, and can lead to indexing bugs if one of the tags is malformed. Always prioritize signal simplicity: one main directive, a minimal markup.

Another classic trap: removing rel=next/prev without checking internal links. If your pagination relies solely on these tags for discovering pages 2+, their removal can isolate URLs. Ensure every page remains accessible via standard HTML links, ideally in the footer or through an infinite scroll “See more” component.

How can I verify that my site complies after adjustments?

Check the actual indexing with a site:votredomaine.com/categorie?page= query in Google. If pages 2+ appear when you have set a noindex, it means the directive is not being read (blocked by robots.txt, served in JavaScript after the first render). Correct the delivery of the meta tag or the HTTP header X-Robots-Tag.

Also, monitor the crawl budget in the Search Console, under Crawl Stats. If Googlebot continues to heavily crawl noindexed pages, it means it discovers them elsewhere (XML sitemap, external links). Remove these URLs from the sitemap, and add a disallow in robots.txt if needed to save budget.

  • Run a complete crawl to identify pages with both rel=next/prev and noindex.
  • Decide on a single strategy: total pagination indexing or focus on page 1.
  • Remove rel=next/prev from noindex pages to eliminate conflicting signals.
  • Ensure each paginated page remains discoverable via HTML links if you remove relational tags.
  • Check actual indexing with targeted site: queries in Google.
  • Monitor the crawl budget post-modification to detect any residual waste.
The coexistence of rel=next/prev + noindex generates a signal conflict that Google resolves by ignoring the relational tags. Clean up your markup, adopt a single directive per page, and ensure your internal linking structure remains strong. These optimizations often touch on deep technical aspects (JavaScript rendering, HTTP headers, crawl budget management). If your pagination architecture is complex or you are uncertain about the strategy to adopt, engaging a specialized SEO agency can help you avoid costly errors and speed up compliance.

❓ Frequently Asked Questions

Google utilise-t-il encore rel=next et rel=prev pour le classement ?
Non. Depuis mars 2019, Google a officiellement cesse d'utiliser ces balises comme signal d'indexation ou de consolidation. Elles n'influencent ni le crawl ni le classement.
Puis-je garder rel=next/prev sur des pages en noindex sans risque ?
Techniquement oui, mais c'est inutile : Google ignore ces balises sur les pages noindexees. Autant les retirer pour simplifier le code et eviter toute ambiguite.
Quelle directive prime si je combine noindex, canonical et rel=prev/next ?
Le noindex l'emporte toujours. Google exclut la page de l'index, rendant les autres directives inoperantes pour cette URL specifique.
Faut-il noindexer les pages 2, 3, 4 d'une pagination pour concentrer le jus SEO ?
Ca depend. Si chaque page contient du contenu unique et cible des long-tail, indexez-les. Sinon, un canonical vers page 1 ou un noindex peut simplifier l'indexation, mais rel=next/prev n'apportera rien de plus.
Comment savoir si mes pages paginees sont reellement indexees malgre un noindex ?
Utilisez une requete site:votredomaine.com/categorie?page= dans Google. Si des pages 2+ apparaissent, verifiez que la balise noindex est bien servie au premier rendu HTML, pas uniquement en JavaScript.
🏷 Related Topics
Domain Age & History Content Crawl & Indexing AI & SEO

🎥 From the same video 25

Other SEO insights extracted from this same Google Search Central video · duration 1h13 · published on 26/06/2017

🎥 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.