5

I have a webpage with almost only static content that weight a compressed size of 25ko.

Should I bother with AMP for pure SEO reasons ? I could very easily opt-in for AMP since the page is AMP-compliant. But the AMP scripts itself adds quite a weight to the page.

Is there any thing I'm missing about AMP aside from a big javascript restriction from a javascript file ?

  • 1
    The real purpose of AMP isn't to create small pages. AMP pages are smallish and static, yes, but that isn't why Google pushes it. The purpose of AMP is to allow Google to use your content. – Stephen Ostermiller Feb 2 at 12:42
3

I just compared two html pages that I created recently. The filesize of the AMPed version is 20 percent larger than the regular page because of the added css/script calls. This, of course, does not include the actual JS the AMPed page requires.

Nobody hates AMPed pages more than I do; Google has pushed this nonsense on us. I say we all use responsive design. The Google Way is to create redundant copies of every single page.

Should you use AMP? Well -- yes, you must if you want to rank on Google. Around 60 percent of searches are being performed on mobile devices. I can understand ranking mobile-friendly sites higher, but the AMPed method is Google tomfoolery. To answer your question: no, you are not missing anything.

Paradoxically, the AMPed version loads in 0.488s and the regular page, 0.7s. This was based upon one test from gtmetrix.com.

  • 1
    Some articles online show AMP pages are actually slower in certain conditions but my complaint is giving the wheel to Google to manage delivery of your web site. What happens should that all goes wrong. Eventually, everything goes all wrong. – Rob Feb 2 at 12:27
2

I did not agree with above answer that you should use AMP if you want to rank for mobile query. I've mobile responsive site, and it drives good traffic on it without AMP.

AMP just block other javascript to render and force you to minimize(or use their own) CSS codes, so your webpage load fast. Another thing is that they even store your site on their own server, it means they don't serve results from your live site, they use their own cache version to show it. So it slightly boost your webpage speed, because it now directly serve from Google cache. Other than that, I don't see any real impact of AMP version.

If you know what AMP does, and if you can do the same with your own site, then you don't require AMP at all. I've static website, which doesn't have any javascript other than Async AdSense codes, and I use internal CSS, so if I try to add AMP on it, then it will add 2-3 more seconds on it. AMP is directly related to speed, so Google use pagespeed as ranking factor without judging what technology you're using.

You can see John Mueller tweet as well

AMP isn't a ranking factor; if you decide to disable it, make sure to redirect appropriately.

And here is my search console data about position. It's all rank good without AMP.

enter image description here

And here is my search console data about devices.

enter image description here

As you can see my majority traffic is coming from mobile searches.

I agree with some specific case like news article where AMP help you to rank on top, because they show carousel stories with rich snippet. But it doesn't apply on all mobile query.

  • 1
    Thanks, didn't notice the ranking factor mention. Well let's hope it doesn't change is a near future. – Ado Ren Feb 3 at 8:40

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.