“As a part of Globe Runner’s New gTLD SEO Power Rankings Index, we gathered data from over 20,000 websites that have been actually built–or developed, on New gTLD domain names. From that list of over 20,000 websites, we have studied these websites’ qualities, and pulled a lot of other interested data.
We were able to find the best New gTLDs based on quality.
Globe Runner took the time to come up with an extensive list of fully developed websites–most of which are indexed in the search engines, and some actually ranking well in the search results.
One of the data points that we analyzed was related to the quality of the websites built on the New gTLD domain names. What we wanted to know is which New gTLDs have been more successful in attracting quality websites to be built on their TLD.
No surprisingly many of the top 20 new gTLD extensions are Geographic or cultural in nature but more than half the list are generic new gTLD’s
Here is the top 20 List:
.nrw
.scot
.brussels
.eus
.bzh
.agency
.wiki
.foundation
.tips
.today
.bayern
.hamburg
.nyc
.digital
.farm
.domains
.london
.marketing
.beer
.guru
Globe Runner also looked at the actual websites with the highest Trust Flow values assigned to them from Majestic. The following is a sample of the best New gTLD domain names that we found based on Trust Flow:
URL Trust Flow:
https://land.nrw/ 71
http://www.gov.scot/ 69
http://be.brussels/ 69
http://www.eitb.eus/ 67
http://www.bretagne.bzh/ 67
http://yanntiersen.bzh/ 66
http://www.leefmilieu.brussels/ 65
http://rabbithole.agency/ 62
http://www.berria.eus/ 61
http://kodi.wiki/ 61
http://lgbt.foundation/ 61
http://www.argia.eus/ 60
http://thehub.tips/ 60
http://www.flowercarpet.brussels/ 60
http://www.kreuzfahrten24.today/ 59
http://cirb.brussels/ 59
http://www.gruenderland.bayern/ 58
https://www.medianet.hamburg/ 57
http://www.pik.bzh/ 56
http://gaycitynews.nyc/ 56
more https://globerunner.com/top-20-best-new-gtlds-based-on-quality/
Whatever…. Not sure I see any value in this study which basically leans on Trust Flow …apart from the typo of “interested data” nothing else caught my eye.
With over 6.5 million names of which about 70% are parked what does this partial report based on a sample size of 20K prove?
Enlighten me please
Sridhar,
Just to be more clear, the sample size wasn’t 20,000. That’s the number of sites that we ultimately came up with that were not ‘parked’ domains.
We started with looking at the top 500 new gTLDs based on number of registrations. That was ALL domains on those top 500. Which is a much larger sample size.
We then narrowed those domains down to only ones that were not parked. Domains that actually had unique content on them. That was about 20,000.
Finally, the results based on us finding the highest quality sites (Trust Flow, backlinks, and other factors I won’t mention).
Thanks Bill. That helps somewhat clarify the universe considered for the study. Now, the outcome however indicates to me that, right of the dot extensions hardly mattered, worse even is the fact that the left of the dot were hardly EMDs.
Our simple tests despite Googles (JM) denial showed us some SEO benefits o keyword.keyword names. That to me is quality of a domain.
Quality of a website that consists of a long laundry list.
Still somewhat unclear what your objective of the study was and what inferences you scientifically drew… please….?
Keep in mind that the original post that TheDomains is linking to was posted back at the end of May. The data was collected during late April and analyzed during May. Some are seeing this for the first time, and think that it’s a new post, when it’s been around for a while.
In this case, we found that compared to .com, .net, and .org, there are a lot less domains actually developed on new extensions. That’s not surprising since it’s still really new.
The goal here was to release show which new extensions have the highest quality sites. That’s all.