Do words in the URL really influence Google rankings?

In what context does Google use words in the URL?

Mueller points out that the use of keywords in the URL occurs right at the beginning of the discovery process. When Googlebot spots a link to a page it has never crawled, it only has access to the URL itself — not yet to the HTML content, title tags, or headings.

This is precisely when words in the URL can provide a initial thematic hint . For example, a URL like \/running-shoes-women immediately suggests the topic, even before the bot has loaded the page. But this signal remains extremely weak.

What happens after crawling and indexing?

Once Google has crawled the page and analyzed its content — titles, text, images, structure — the URL loses all importance as a ranking factor . The engine then has hundreds of signals that are much more powerful: semantic relevance, content quality, backlinks, UX, etc.

Specifically, a page with a neutral URL like \/p12345 but ultra-relevant and optimized content will rank better than a page with a keyword-stuffed URL \/best-cheap-running-shoes-women-men and mediocre content. Content outweighs the URL in the hierarchy of signals.

Why should this statement be taken seriously?

Because it helps to debunk a persistent SEO myth that has lasted for over 15 years: that stuffing keywords into the URL would guarantee better ranking. Generations of SEOs have wasted time optimizing slugs at the expense of much more important priorities.

Mueller is not saying that clean URLs are useless — they remain essential for UX, user understanding of the link, and SERP readability. But as a pure ranking lever , it is negligible once the page is indexed.

• Very weak signal used only during the initial discovery of the URL
• After crawling and indexing, words in the URL no longer influence rankings
• A clean URL remains useful for UX and readability , not for direct ranking
• Investing time in keyword stuffing URLs is a waste of energy compared to optimizing the content itself
• Short, understandable URLs that are consistent with the site's hierarchy remain a best practice , but for reasons other than pure SEO

Is this statement consistent with real-world observations?

Let’s be honest: yes, it is . For years, A/B testing on high-traffic sites shows that a change in URL — even from a neutral slug to a keyword-rich slug — results in no measurable ranking variation once the redirects are in place and the pages re-indexed.

What really matters is the overall consistency of the architecture , the depth of pages in the hierarchy, and the structure of internal links. A URL \/category\/subcategory\/product helps Google understand the site hierarchy, but not because the words are present — rather, because the structure is logical and reflects the linking.

What nuances should be added to this claim?

Mueller talks about “language of the URL” , which is an important detail. He does not say that the structure or depth of the URL has no impact — just that the specific keywords present in the slug are negligible. A deep URL at 6 levels \/a\/b\/c\/d\/e\/f\/page still poses problems for crawl budget and internal PageRank, even if it contains keywords.

Additionally, URLs have an indirect impact on CTR in SERPs. A clean, explicit slug like \/buy-electric-bike inspires more trust than a \/p?id=xyz123 . This is not a ranking factor, but it influences user behavior — and therefore, ultimately, the UX signals that Google can capture. [To be verified] to what extent Google integrates this organic CTR into its ranking algorithms.

In what situations does this rule not apply?

There is one case where the URL holds weight: international SEO . Google uses URL structure (\/fr\/ , .fr , ?lang=fr ) as a signal for geographic or language targeting, combined with hreflang tags. Here, it is not a ranking factor in the classic sense, but a local relevance signal .

Another edge case: news sites or very recent blogs. When Google massively discovers new URLs via an XML sitemap or RSS feed, even before crawling them, it can use the words in the URL to prioritize certain pages in the queue. But this is crawl scheduling, not ranking — and the effect disappears as soon as the page is indexed.

What should you concretely do with this information?

Stop wasting time on keyword stuffing your slugs . If you have a URL that works well, even if it’s not stuffed with keywords, don’t change it just to ‘optimize’. The cost of a 301 redirect (dilution of PageRank, risk of temporary ranking loss) far outweighs the potential gain — which is close to zero.

Rather, focus on clarity and consistency . A URL needs to be understandable for a human reading it in a shared link, in the address bar, or in the SERPs. It should reflect the logical hierarchy of your site. That's all.

What mistakes should you absolutely avoid?

Do not create lengthy URLs by stacking up keyword variants: \/buy-cheap-running-shoes-women-promo-sales . It's counterproductive for UX and adds nothing to ranking. Google may even see it as keyword stuffing , even if it’s in the URL.

Avoid massive URL changes during a redesign without a clear strategic reason. I have seen sites lose 30% of traffic because they decided to ‘clean up’ all their URLs by removing keywords, without properly managing redirects or anticipating impacts on internal linking. If the current URL works, leave it alone .

How can you check if your URLs are optimal?

Audit the average depth of URLs for your strategic pages. If your best-selling products are buried 5 clicks away from the homepage, it’s an architecture problem — not a keyword issue in the URL. Use Screaming Frog or a crawler to map depth and identify orphan pages or overly deep ones.

Also, check the consistency of your naming conventions. If some URLs use \/category\/ and others use \/cat\/ , it’s not critical for ranking, but it’s a nightmare for maintenance, auditing, and analytics reporting. Standardize to make your own work easier, not to please Google.

• Audit the average depth of your strategic URLs (max 3-4 levels ideally)
• Remove unnecessary keyword-stuffed slugs during your next content creation
• Never change a URL that performs well just to ‘optimize’ keywords
• Ensure every URL is readable and understandable by a human
• Standardize your URL naming conventions to facilitate auditing and tracking
• Focus your efforts on content, title/meta tags, and Hn structure rather than on slugs
  In summary: clean URLs remain a best practice for UX, architecture, and maintenance, but no longer serve as a ranking lever once the page is indexed. Invest your time where the impact is measurable — content, technical aspects, link building. However, these architectural and prioritization optimizations can still be complex to orchestrate on high-volume sites or during migrations. If you're lacking internal resources or wish to avoid costly mistakes, enlisting a specialized SEO agency can save you time and secure your strategic choices.