Decision tree
Free online backlink analysis of a spam spike, before any disavow
Eighty new referring domains overnight feels like an attack. It may be, or it may be a scraper that will vanish by next month. Measure the shape first, then choose.
Start with the habit most people skip
Count before you clean. A disavow file is a permanent-feeling decision made on a feeling, and a count takes minutes.
Google's own guidance says most sites do not need the disavow tool, and that it is meant for cases with a manual action or a real pattern of paid or spammy links you cannot remove. A spike that matches neither is a measurement task first.
Free means free here. A free online backlink analysis here means the free actions only: domain, overview, stats and suggest cost no credits and need no key. They tell you whether the headline numbers moved. The rest of this page uses a few cheap paid calls to describe the spike properly.
Write down the date you first noticed the spike, because the next monthly copy will tell you whether it was a one-off. Many scraper bursts leave on their own, which is a good reason not to rush.
Four measurements that describe a spike
Each one is a single call billed once, whatever the number of rows. Together they cost under a cent. Run them on the day you notice the spike and again a month later, so you can see whether the shape persists. See the field reference for what each action returns.
TLD mix of the new domains
tld_breakdown costs 1 credit. A pile of domains on one odd extension looks different from a spread across .com, .org and country codes.
DR distribution
dr_distribution costs 1 credit. If the new domains all sit in the lowest band, they carry little weight under any reading.
Anchor text
anchors costs 2 credits. Money-keyword anchors repeated across many domains suggest manipulation, while brand and URL anchors suggest scrapers.
Target pages
toppages costs 2 credits. If the spike points at pages that never ranked, it is probably irrelevant to your rank question.
Myth versus what the data usually shows
| Common belief | What to test instead |
|---|---|
| A 60 percent toxic score means a penalty is coming | Scores are tool-specific. Check for a manual action in Search Console and measure rank by page group |
| Every adult or gambling link must be disavowed | Check whether they point at pages that matter and whether the anchors are yours |
| My DR dropped, so the spam did it | DR here is a log of referring domains, so a spike should raise it. Check which domains were lost |
| A competitor is sabotaging me | Possible, but unproven. Look for money anchors on your best pages and dates that match a drop |
The scope check as three calls
curl -s "https://rankele.com/api.php?action=tld_breakdown&q=example.com&key=sk_live_..."
curl -s "https://rankele.com/api.php?action=dr_distribution&q=example.com&key=sk_live_..."
curl -s "https://rankele.com/api.php?action=anchors&q=example.com&per=200&key=sk_live_..."
# run them again next month; a profile that moved back needed no file at allDecision tree, written as questions in order
- Is there a manual action in Search Console? If yes, follow Google's reconsideration process. If no, continue.
- Did your rankings move in a window that overlaps the spike? If no, log it and stop; recheck in 30 days.
- Do the new domains cluster on one TLD, one DR band and a few anchors? If yes, you likely have a single source. If they are spread out, treat it as noise.
- Do the anchors carry your money keywords? If yes, that pattern deserves action. If they are brand or bare URLs, wait.
- Can you contact the site owners? If it takes minutes, ask first. If not, a disavow file for the clearest cluster is reasonable.
- Did you save the before and after copies? If no, take one now using the diff recipe.