The Backlinks that google webmaster finds. Are they...

[BDahlin]

really all the backlinks that google finds for your page? The only links that are being found to affect your PageRank?

More info?

[angelicasmith]

Please clarify

[BDahlin]

When you look at google webmasters and go to -Links to your site. It lists a bunch of links. My question is, Other programs (SEO spyglass, ext..) may find more links to your website that google webmasters doesn't. The links that webmasters does show you, are those all the links google is aware of and ranks you based off of? What about the links webmasters doesnt show, does google not see those?

[LD]

I actually started a thread on this a while back. But the consensus was - WMT will sometimes find more links than software like SpyGlass. However, SpyGlass will find updated links daily, if you are building a good link profile with quality backlinks, where as WMT is only updated periodically.

But, as in another thread just started here today, there are inconsistencies that users have to be prepared to accept with the various types of software both resident and online. The thing is - find one you like (and can afford) and stay with it. But, it's always nice to verify that data with another tool just to make sure you are getting reasonable data.

I liken this to hitting golf balls in a small "inside" driving range over the winter and unknowingly perfecting the most spectacular slice or hook. You don't know what you've done over the winter until you play the courses in the spring. No one is safe around me when I play!

[devkant]

The google webmaster tools doesn't show all the links but it shows you a sample type for your backlinks the list. There is no such thing becuase, we see different tools different results.

[lets4410]

As long as you consistently build links then you know you're headed in the right direction, all the checkers that I've found tell you different info so I try not to worry to much about 1 in particular.

[BDahlin]

But the backlinks Google Webmasters finds.... Are those all the backlinks google knows exists (for pagerank and such)?

[xmachinecorex]

i think all tools are different it depends on how much maintenance and how much effort goes behind the scenes to make them actually work correctly.

i can check a site of mine at backlinkwatch.com which is very accurate(though only up to 1000 links) and it will tell me that i have 500 backlinks and list them all, but i go to another backlink checker and it only picks up the strongest links that rank well in the major engines so i get s return of like only 100 backlinks, which i know is false. I also know that alot of the links it is not picking up ARE indeed very valuable links

so your guess is as good as anyone elses.

[weegillis]

But the backlinks Google Webmasters finds.... Are those all the backlinks google knows exists (for pagerank and such)?

Knowing how close to the chest SE's keep their cards, I wager strongly toward a solid, 'No, they are not the only links used to calculate PR.'

And we should also note that just because a back link checker may be able to surfeit out all a site's inbounds, doesn't mean the SE's are working as aggressively to compile their own list, which invariably leads to disagreement between the two. What's more, I highly doubt that the engine behind the PR calculation is the same one feeding information to WMT, nor do they operate on the same data (in my estimation).

I would tend to put more credence in the keywords being focused upon as an indication of how G sees a site. They are not that interested in sharing any of the real hearty stuff.

As far as back link checking goes, it is in my mind a total waste of time. A cursory look through the site logs is more than adequate when it comes to tracking down inbound traffic. There are the back links that are actually bringing traffic.

[deepsand]

No crawler can find everything, not even that of Google. That which is found and indexed is but the tip of an iceberg, one that continues to grow at an astounding rate, one whose whole will never be indexed.

And, no SE has a vested interest in divulging all that it knows, but only that which it deems to be useful for its own purposes.

To seek and expect to find all of ones own IBLs is to undertake a fool's errand.