Objective
Our experiment dives into the heart of SEO performance by comparing two widely used WordPress builders: Divi vs Gutenberg. The crux of our investigation is to uncover which builder potentially holds the upper hand in Google’s search rankings.
Hypothesis
Given Gutenberg’s integration as the default WordPress editor, we hypothesize it may have a natural SEO advantage over Divi. This theory posits that the Gutenberg-powered site (http://expdmseo001.tk/) might secure the coveted first position in Google’s search results, overshadowing its Divi counterpart (http://expdmseo001.com.au/).
Methodology
Materials:
- Both sites will be hosted on a high-performance VPS to ensure hosting quality does not influence results.
- We’ll maintain a plugin-free environment on both sites to eliminate any external performance influences.
- The Gutenberg site will be adorned with the minimalist Twenty Twenty-One theme, while the Divi site will leverage the feature-rich Divi theme.
- The unique keyword “expdmseo001” will serve as our test variable, chosen for its absence in current Google search results.
- We’ll forego HTTPS to maintain consistency between the sites, focusing purely on the builders’ SEO capabilities.
- Both sites will feature dummy content peppered with our test keyword, replacing the classic ‘lorem ipsum’ placeholder.
- Links from this analysis will be the sole external connections to these test sites, avoiding any undue influence from external backlinks.
Procedure:
- Domain procurement was done with expdmseo001.com.au from Crazy Domains and expdmseo001.tk through Freenom, ensuring distinct domain extensions.
- A unified hosting account was established on Siteground for both domains, standardizing the hosting environment.
- Following WordPress installation, we meticulously removed any default themes and plugins to ensure a clean slate.
- Custom CSS tweaks were applied to both sites to strip away headers and footers, focusing attention on the content’s SEO.
- The Divi theme was installed on the .com.au domain, setting the stage for our Divi site.
- We crafted a ‘Home’ page on the Divi site, embedding a single text module filled with modified lorem ipsum text featuring our keyword.
- Similarly, the .tk domain was set up with a basic text block on its ‘Home’ page, mirroring the content strategy of the Divi site.
- Sitemap generation for both sites was handled using a Sitemap Generator tool, ensuring Google’s seamless indexing.
- Both sites were registered under Google Search Console, with their respective sitemaps submitted for indexing.
Observations
Contrary to our initial hypothesis, the Divi version demonstrated superior performance in search rankings over the Gutenberg version.
Analysis
The use of a paid .com.au domain for the Divi site introduces a potential bias, suggesting that the domain’s commercial nature might inadvertently favour Divi in SEO performance. This aspect warrants consideration for future experiments, suggesting a controlled environment with either two free domains or two paid domains to eliminate any domain-related advantages.
FAQs
- What is the main difference between Divi and Gutenberg?
- Divi is a feature-rich WordPress builder, while Gutenberg is the default editor with a minimalist approach.
- Which performs better for SEO, Divi or Gutenberg?
- Our experiment showed Divi outperforming Gutenberg in search rankings, though domain factors may play a role.
- How does domain type affect SEO performance?
- Paid domains, like .com.au, may be perceived as more authoritative than free domains, impacting SEO rankings.
- Is Gutenberg’s integration in WordPress an SEO advantage?
- While Gutenberg is built into WordPress, it did not show a clear SEO advantage in this experiment.
- Can using a premium theme like Divi improve SEO?
- Our test showed better results with Divi, but more research is needed to confirm if the theme itself influences SEO.
Reflective Conclusion
While Divi showcased a stronger SEO performance in this instance, the domain variable suggests that the results may not solely reflect the builders’ capabilities. Our commitment to rigorous analysis prompts a reiteration of this experiment under more controlled conditions, ensuring an equitable comparison that truly isolates the builders’ SEO efficacy.