Link building is the work of earning links from other websites to pages on your own site. A link from another site to yours is called a backlink. When a site links to you, it does two things at once: it sends its readers to your page, and it tells Google that your page was worth pointing to. Link building is everything you do to earn more of those links honestly: making pages worth citing, finding the sites that might cite them, and asking well.
This guide is the plain version: what a backlink is, why Google still counts links, how the process works step by step, and where the line sits between good practice and trouble. It ends with one link earned end to end, and a realistic plan for your first month.
Key takeaways
- Link building is earning links from other websites to yours. The other site decides whether to link, where, and with what words, and that is exactly why Google counts links.
- Google documents links as a ranking input in its own guides: its systems analyse how pages link to each other, and PageRank remains part of its core ranking systems.
- The process is five steps: make something worth citing, find the right sites, ask well, let the editor decide, then record, follow up, and repeat.
- Good practice is anything a linking site would defend to its readers. The practices to avoid are listed by name in Google’s spam policies.
What is a backlink?
A backlink is a clickable link on someone else’s website that leads to a page on yours. Three parts are worth knowing: the linking page, where the link sits on the other site; the target page, your page it points to; and the anchor text, the clickable wording. Google’s SEO Starter Guide explains why that wording matters: link text tells users and Google something about the page you are linking to, and with appropriate anchor text, users and search engines can easily understand what your linked pages contain before they visit.
A small example. A gardening blog writes a guide to composting and, in a paragraph about soil, links the words “our soil testing checklist” to a checklist on your garden store’s site. That link is a backlink for your store, and the blog chose to add it, where it sits, and the words. Almost everything in link building follows from that: the other site decides.
Links inside your own site, from one page to another, are internal links. They help readers and crawlers find their way around, but they are not backlinks, and they are not what this guide means by link building.
Why links matter to Google
Google judges pages partly on evidence from outside the page, and links are the oldest form of that evidence it documents.
First, links are how Google finds pages. The SEO Starter Guide states that Google primarily finds pages through links from other pages it already crawled, and that the vast majority of the new pages Google finds every day are through links. A page nobody links to is a page Google may never notice.
Second, links feed ranking. Google’s guide to its ranking systems says it has various systems that understand how pages link to each other, as a way to determine what pages are about and which might be most helpful in response to a query. Among these is PageRank, one of its core ranking systems used when Google first launched, which the guide says continues to be part of its core ranking systems today. Links are not a rumour or a leftover trick; Google documents them as one of the ways it decides what a page is and how much it should be trusted.
Third, quality is the whole game. A link is an editorial decision: a writer judged that your page would help their readers. That is why one link from a relevant site that chose you freely outweighs a pile of links from sites that link to anyone. Links also carry a plain human value: people click them, and arrive already interested.
One limit to keep in view: links are one input among several. Google still has to crawl and index your page and judge the content itself. Links cannot rescue a page Google cannot reach, or one that does not answer the search. Link building works alongside good content and sound basics, not instead of them.
How link building works: the process in five steps
Strip away the jargon and almost every honest link is earned the same way.
Step 1: Create something worth linking to. Original data, a clear guide, a free tool, a checklist, a study of your own. Sites link to pages that make their own page better. If nothing on your site is citable, outreach has nothing to stand on.
Step 2: Find the right sites. Prospects are sites whose readers would genuinely care: sites in your niche, sites that already link to similar resources, sites your audience reads. A practical shortcut: check which sites link to pages like yours. They have already shown they link out on this topic.
Step 3: Make the ask. A short, specific message: who you are, the page you are suggesting, and why it helps their readers. Personal and brief beats long and templated. You are asking an editor to stake a little of their reputation on your page.
Step 4: The editor decides. If they link, they choose the target page, the placement, and the anchor text. That loss of control is not a flaw; it is exactly what makes the link worth something to Google.
Step 5: Record, follow up, and support the page. Log every pitch and reply. Follow up once, politely, then move on. On your own site, link from your related pages to the page you are promoting, so readers and crawlers reach it easily.
Notice which steps you control: one, two, three, and five. The step that creates the value, step four, belongs to someone else. That is the difference between building links and simply placing them.
The main ways links are earned
Earned editorial links. A site cites you without being asked, because your page helped its writer. These arrive slowest and carry the most weight: nobody was persuaded or paid.
Outreach links. You ask, and an editor agrees: a guest post on a real site in your niche, a place on a curated resource page, or your page offered as the replacement for a broken link. This is the workhorse method for most sites.
Press and expert links. Journalists and writers quote you, cover your data, or report your product news. Small sites earn these by answering expert requests and by publishing findings worth reporting.
Relationship and local links. Partners, suppliers, associations, and community sites link to businesses they work with. Local businesses have a whole playbook of their own here, covered in our local link building guide.
Each route produces different kinds of links with different value and different risk. The full map, organised by how each link is earned, lives in our guide to the types of backlinks.
One technical label sits across all of them. A normal link passes ranking credit. A link can also be marked rel=”nofollow”, rel=”sponsored”, or rel=”ugc”. Since Google’s September 2019 announcement, those marks are treated as hints, which Google says it will generally not consider for ranking purposes. Which mark fits which link is a full topic of its own: do nofollow links help SEO.
What good and bad link building look like
Google does not publish a list of approved tactics. It does something more useful. Its spam policies define link spam as creating links primarily to manipulate search rankings, then name the practices that count. Read the list and the shape of good practice is obvious: good link building creates links a site would defend to its own readers; bad link building creates links that exist only for Google.
| Good practice (build this) | Bad practice (named in Google’s spam policies) |
|---|---|
| Publish original data, guides, or tools that other sites cite by choice | Create low-value content primarily to manipulate linking and ranking signals |
| Pitch relevant sites a page that genuinely helps their readers | Run large-scale guest posting or article campaigns built around keyword-rich anchor text |
| Buy advertising or sponsorships with the link marked rel=”sponsored” or rel=”nofollow” | Buy or sell links that pass ranking credit without qualifying them |
| Link naturally to real partners you actually work with | Build excessive link exchanges or partner pages made only for cross-linking |
| List your business on directories and profiles your customers use | Generate low-quality directory or bookmark links, or use automated programs to create links |
| Take part in communities as a genuine member | Post forum comments carrying optimised links in the text or signature, or hide links in widgets and footers spread across many sites |
The paid row deserves one plain sentence, because beginners get it wrong most often. The policies state that buying and selling links is a normal part of the web’s economy for advertising and sponsorship, and is not a violation when links are qualified with a rel=”nofollow” or rel=”sponsored” value. Paid is not the sin. Passing ranking credit in secret is.
The consequences are built into the system. Google’s ranking systems guide records that Penguin, its link spam system, was announced in 2012 and integrated into its core ranking systems in 2016, alongside the spam detection systems it runs against policy violations. Manipulative links tend to end one of two ways: ignored, which wastes the money, or counted against the site they were meant to lift, which creates a cleanup job.
What about DA, DR, and the other link scores?
Beginners often meet link building through scores: Domain Authority from Moz, Domain Rating from Ahrefs, and similar numbers from 0 to 100. Be clear about what these are: estimates built by the tool companies from their own crawl data. Useful for sorting a long prospect list, but they are not Google metrics, Google does not use them, and no threshold such as “DR 40 or above” appears in any Google document.
Judge a possible link the way an editor would. Is the site real? Is it read by people like your audience? Is it on your topic? Would its owner link to you in front of their readers? A modest site that passes those tests beats a big score that fails them.
One link, earned end to end (an illustrative example)
Example (illustrative, not a real case): Ana writes a small blog about home coffee. She has no budget and no contacts, so she starts with step one: an asset. Over two weekends she brews the same beans five different ways, timing each method and tasting with a simple score sheet, then publishes the results as one clear comparison chart.
For step two, she checks which sites link to a rival chart she admires. One name keeps appearing: an equipment review site whose resources page for new home brewers already links to two similar charts. That tells her the editor links out on this topic and the page is maintained.
Her pitch, in full, is five short lines:
Subject: A brewing methods chart for your resources page
Hi [Name], your resources page links to two guides on brewing methods. I tested five methods side by side with the same beans and published the timings and tasting notes as one chart: [URL]. If it fits the page, your readers can compare methods before they buy equipment. Either way, thanks for the page, it helped me when I started. Ana
Silence for a week. She follows up once, adding one useful line: a printable version of the chart is now available. Four days later the editor replies, and the link goes live with the anchor text “home brewing methods compared”. Those are the editor’s words, not the keyword Ana would have chosen, which is normal and fine.
The link sends her a small, steady trickle of readers, and over the following weeks the chart page begins appearing for longer, more specific questions about brewing times. Ana then repeats the cycle with a dozen similar sites, a fresh pitch for each.
Notice what she controlled and what she did not. The asset, the list, and the emails were hers. The decision, the placement, and the anchor text were the editor’s. That split is not a weakness of the method. It is the method.
Your first link building month
Month one is for building the machine, not harvesting results. Here is a realistic shape for it.
| Week | Focus | Done when |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Foundations. Confirm Google can crawl and index your key pages in Search Console, fix anything blocking it, pick 3 to 5 target pages, and note the competitors ranking for your terms | Target pages indexed, competitor list written down |
| 2 | One linkable asset. Create or improve one page worth citing: a guide, a chart, a checklist, or small original data | The asset is live and you would happily send it to a stranger |
| 3 | Prospects and pitches. Build a list of relevant sites using the process above, then send small batches of personal pitches | Every top prospect contacted once, every send logged |
| 4 | Follow up and support. Send one polite follow-up to non-replies, add internal links from your related pages to the target page, and record every result | Replies and results logged, next month’s list started |
Set the bar where Google sets it. The SEO Starter Guide warns that changes take time to show in results: some take effect in a few hours, others could take several months, and it advises waiting a few weeks to assess the effect. Links are slower than most, because another site has to publish first and Google has to crawl the linking page afterwards.
So judge month one on outputs you control: one solid asset live, a prospect list you can defend name by name, every pitch sent and logged, follow-ups done. First links often arrive inside the month, but treat them as a bonus, not the test. What compounds is the system: an asset that keeps earning mentions, a growing list, and editors who now know your name. Anyone promising page one in 30 days is selling the pattern in the bad column above.
The bottom line
Link building is giving other sites good reasons to link to yours, then asking well. Google counts links because they are public, editorial decisions, and its own documents say the systems that read them still sit in its core ranking systems. Earn links a site would defend to its readers, stay clear of the documented spam patterns, and measure the work in months, not days. That is the whole strategy. Everything else is execution.
Frequently asked questions
What is link building, in simple words?
Link building is the work of earning links from other websites to yours. You make pages worth citing, find sites whose readers would benefit from them, and ask those sites to link. Each earned link is a public recommendation: it helps Google find and judge your pages, and it can send you visitors directly.
Is link building the same as SEO?
No. Link building is one part of SEO, the off-page part. Google also needs to crawl and index your pages, and your content has to answer the search well. Links give a good page the authority to compete. They do not fix a page Google cannot reach, or a page that does not help the searcher.
Are paid links always against Google’s rules?
No. Google’s spam policies say buying and selling links is a normal part of the web’s economy for advertising and sponsorship purposes, and it is not a violation when the links are qualified with a rel=”sponsored” or rel=”nofollow” attribute value. What the policies define as link spam is buying or selling links that pass ranking credit without that qualification.
How long does link building take to show results?
Slowly, and Google says so itself. Its SEO Starter Guide notes that changes can take from a few hours to several months to show in results, and advises waiting a few weeks before judging whether work had a beneficial effect. A new link also has to be published and then crawled. Expect month one to produce the asset, the list, and the conversations, with ranking movement, when it comes, building over the months after.
How many backlinks do I need to rank?
There is no fixed number, and Google publishes no target. It depends on the pages you are competing with: look at the sites ranking for your term and at the quality and relevance of the links they earned. A smaller set of relevant, editorial links commonly outweighs a large set of weak ones, so chase quality you can defend, not a count.
