Teardown
Internal links that go through a redirect, and why most sites can relax
Three in four sites I audited did it. For most startup sites it is tidying, not an emergency.
On this page
32 of the 42 startup sites I audited had internal links pointing at an address that redirects somewhere else. At 76%, it was the most common thing I found.
It is also the finding most often oversold. Audit tools flag every one, usually in red. Google's own documentation suggests that for a site of this size it is tidying rather than a problem.
What I found
42 startup sites, 14,023 pages, crawled 15 to 18 September 2026
- Sites affected
- 32 of 42 (76%)
- Typical size
- 16 link targets on the median affected site
- Also had broken links
- 23 of those 32
Why it happens: the address moved, the link did not
Somebody changed an address. The site moved from http to https, added or dropped a trailing slash, renamed a section, or merged two pages. A redirect was set up, correctly, so the old address still works. But the links in the navigation, the footer or older articles still point at the old address, so every click takes one extra hop.
Nothing visibly fails, which is exactly why it is so common. Nobody notices a link that works.
Why it rarely matters at startup size
The case for removing every redirecting link usually rests on crawl efficiency: the idea that Google has limited time for your site and wastes it on extra hops. Google's guide on crawl budget covers this, and it begins by saying who it is for:
If your site doesn't have a large number of pages that change rapidly, or if your pages seem to be crawled the same day that they are published, you don't need to read this guide.
Google Search Central, crawl budget
The guide names the sites it is written for: a million pages or more, or ten thousand or more that change every day. Most startup sites are nowhere near that size. For everyone else, the same guide says the basics are enough:
For Google Search specifically, keeping your sitemap up to date and checking the Page Indexing report regularly is adequate.
Google Search Central, crawl budget
So my audit rubric rates this Low, and says why, rather than presenting it as urgent.
When it is worth fixing anyway
Three situations. A chain, where one redirect leads to another, because every hop adds a little delay for the visitor. A redirect that was meant to be temporary and has quietly become permanent. And, most usefully, as a clue.
23 of the 32 sites with redirecting links also had broken ones. Where a change of addresses left links pointing at old URLs, some of those old URLs were never redirected at all. Fixing the redirecting links is how the broken ones get found.
Check your own site, no code needed
- Open your site and click through the links in the main navigation and the footer, one at a time.
- Watch the address bar. If the address changes after the page loads, for example a slash appears or disappears, or http becomes https, that link went through a redirect.
- Once Search Console is set up, the Pages report lists addresses Google found that redirect, under Page with redirect. Old internal links often turn up there.
What to ask your developer
- Can the navigation and footer links point at the final address rather than the old one?
- Do any of the site's redirects lead to a page that redirects again?
What I could not tell from outside
I counted link targets, not clicks. A redirecting link in the footer counts once, even though it appears on every page.
I could not see why each address changed, or whether a redirect was meant to be temporary.
These are counts on 42 startup sites I audited from the outside, mostly developer tools and SaaS. They are not an industry average, and nothing here measured whether any of these sites performed worse in search because of what I found.
Want to know which of these your site has?
Send a URL. Three to five verified findings come back within two working days, free, each with a way to check it yourself.