{"id":2238,"date":"2026-11-06T02:06:31","date_gmt":"2026-11-06T02:06:31","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/seoscanpro.ai\/blog\/google-search-on-urls-ranking-factor-hyphens-vs-underscores-emojis\/"},"modified":"2026-11-07T04:37:28","modified_gmt":"2026-11-07T04:37:28","slug":"google-search-on-urls-ranking-factor-hyphens-vs-underscores-emojis","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/seoscanpro.ai\/blog\/google-search-on-urls-ranking-factor-hyphens-vs-underscores-emojis\/","title":{"rendered":"Google Search on URLs: Ranking Factor, Hyphens vs Underscores, and Emojis"},"content":{"rendered":"

Website owners can make better URL decisions by treating keywords as a minor part of an audit, while checking readability, technical resolution, and the consequences of redirects. In Google\u2019s October 14, 2026 Non-Canonical Cabinet video, Gary Illyes discussed how Google Search handles URLs and said that keywords in a URL or domain are an \u201cincredibly small signal\u201d for rankings and won\u2019t do much.<\/p>\n

What to Leave Alone in a URL Audit<\/h2>\n

Google does not require sites to rewrite every keyword-heavy URL. Illyes said URL keywords would \u201cwon\u2019t do much\u201d in the Non-Canonical Cabinet video, published October 14, 2026. The example he used, a path resembling \u201cbest-grilled-chicken-cheap-delicious-amaze-amaze-amaze,\u201d showed that repeating descriptive or commercial terms does not guarantee the top position.<\/p>\n

For an audit, that means repeated or irrelevant words in a domain or path are a low-priority ranking observation. Record the pattern and judge whether it creates a site-management or user-navigation problem. Do not recommend a broad rewrite solely because a URL contains keywords or because an audit template treats keyword placement as a major defect.<\/p>\n

Existing URLs also do not need changing for ranking reasons alone. A site audit should preserve a working URL when there is no legitimate reason to replace it. A useful review records whether the page is indexed, whether the URL is linked elsewhere, and whether changing it would affect a stable site structure. Without that context, a keyword label should not trigger a migration recommendation.<\/p>\n

What to Flag in a URL Audit<\/h2>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Check<\/th>\nPattern to Inspect<\/th>\nAudit Severity<\/th>\nEvidence to Record<\/th>\nWhen to Skip a Rewrite<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n
Repeated or irrelevant keywords<\/td>\nDomains or paths with repeated commercial or descriptive terms<\/td>\nLow for ranking<\/td>\nThe repeated terms, the page\u2019s indexing status, and whether the path remains useful to visitors<\/td>\nConsider the context and any observed problem before recommending a rewrite.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Readable word separators<\/td>\nPaths using underscores<\/td>\nLow, usability review<\/td>\nThe existing path, the proposed path, and the reason for changing it<\/td>\nConsider the site\u2019s current structure and the observed behavior.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Emoji in a path<\/td>\nPaths containing percent-encoded emoji<\/td>\nLow to medium, usability and compatibility review<\/td>\nThe encoded address, where it appears, and whether visitors can read, copy, share, and reach it reliably<\/td>\nConsider the observed behavior and any documented reason for a change.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

Hyphens versus underscores needs careful treatment. Illyes recommended hyphens in a URL path for separating words, but the source account also notes that Google has said it does not care much about the difference when judging whether a URL is low quality. Review readability without claiming a ranking benefit. A separator review can guide new URL templates without treating every underscore as a major ranking defect.<\/p>\n

SEOScanPro runs website SEO audits, including local SEO audits and on-page analysis.<\/p>\n

What to Verify About Domains and Paths<\/h2>\n

Internationalized domain names need a resolution check rather than an automatic correction. According to Illyes in the Non-Canonical Cabinet video, Google can process internationalized domains. Their online representation uses Punycode, with compatible labels carrying the \u201cxn--\u201d prefix. That prefix is part of the encoding format, not evidence of a typo.<\/p>\n

Record whether the domain resolves as expected, serves the intended site, and fits the current site structure. A domain containing \u201cxn--\u201d should not be flagged merely because the prefix looks unusual. Review any observed technical or organizational problem before recommending action.<\/p>\n

Google can also detect spam signals within URLs. Illyes said this in the same October 2026 video. The practical audit check is narrow: look for repeated or irrelevant terms that appear designed to influence rankings. Document the terms, compare them with the page\u2019s purpose, and avoid expanding the finding beyond what the URL actually shows.<\/p>\n

How to Review a URL Change Safely<\/h2>\n

Review a URL change by checking the destination page and the path that leads to it. Avoid disruption and do not promise a ranking gain.<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. Document the current URL.<\/strong> Record the existing address, its role in the site structure, and the traffic or conversion context known to the site owner.<\/li>\n
  2. State the legitimate reason for the change.<\/strong> Record the practical reason, such as a site-management or user-navigation problem. Do not assume that keywords will improve rankings.<\/li>\n
  3. Check the destination and redirect behavior.<\/strong> Confirm that the final destination is the intended page and that the redirect behavior follows Google\u2019s official guidance on site moves and redirects.<\/li>\n
  4. Preserve equivalent page content.<\/strong> Review whether the new URL leads to the same relevant content and fulfills the purpose of the original page.<\/li>\n
  5. Validate the final URL after implementation.<\/strong> Record the implemented address, confirm that it resolves correctly, and review internal links, redirects, and any indexing issue found during validation.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    Google does not want sites to change URLs unless they have a real reason.<\/p>\n

    How Search Visibility Fits the Decision<\/h2>\n

    URL structure is part of a broader search system, but its direct ranking weight is limited. In a related 2025 study, Pew Research Center<\/a> analyzed browsing data from 900 U.S. adults and 68,879 Google searches. Among searches that produced an AI summary, users clicked a traditional result in 8% of visits, compared with 15% when no AI summary appeared.<\/p>\n

    For audit work, focus on verified technical and usability problems. Preserve URLs that work, and change them for legitimate operational reasons.<\/p>\n

    What to Do Now<\/h2>\n
      \n
    1. Review keyword repetition.<\/strong> Mark repeated or irrelevant domain and path terms as low priority. Record whether they are indexed and useful to visitors before suggesting any change.<\/li>\n
    2. Apply the separator preference to new paths.<\/strong> Hyphens are the format Illyes recommended for separating words. Keep the recommendation focused on readability and avoid mandatory redirects for working URLs that use underscores.<\/li>\n
    3. Verify internationalized domains.<\/strong> Confirm that the domain resolves correctly.<\/li>\n
    4. Review emoji paths.<\/strong> Record the encoded form and test whether the address remains usable for visitors and the systems that process it. Treat an emoji URL as a usability and compatibility observation unless its behavior demonstrates a functional problem.<\/li>\n
    5. Document every proposed URL change.<\/strong> Use the safe-review sequence to record the reason, destination, redirect behavior, equivalent content, and final validation result.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

      FAQ<\/h2>\n

      Do Mixed Hyphens and Underscores Require Redirects?<\/h3>\n

      Consider the broader context and any observed problem. Gary Illyes recommended hyphens for separating words in URL paths, but the source account also notes that Google has said it does not care much about the difference when determining whether a URL is low quality. Consider whether a practical reason supports a redirect rather than assuming that keywords will improve rankings.<\/p>\n

      Is the \u201cXn–\u201d Prefix in a Domain Name an Error?<\/h3>\n

      No. An audit should verify that the domain resolves correctly and serves the intended site, rather than flagging the prefix by itself.<\/p>\n

      Should an Emoji URL Be Replaced?<\/h3>\n

      Review it for readability, sharing, encoding, and compatibility. Gary Illyes noted that emoji in URL paths involve percent-encoding and can create practical problems, but the source does not identify them as a direct ranking penalty. Replace one when there is a documented usability or technical reason, or when it serves no legitimate business purpose.<\/p>\n

      Try the rank tracker<\/h2>\n

      \"SEOScanPro,<\/a><\/p>\n

      SEOScanPro runs a full technical audit of a site and shows the measured result behind every check. Open the rank tracker<\/a>.<\/p>\n

      This article reports on publicly available information from the sources listed below. We have no reason to believe it is inaccurate, but we have not independently verified every claim, and details may change as the story develops.<\/em><\/div>\n
      \n

      Sources<\/h2>\n