How to Find Lower-Quality Content Being Excluded from Index (Bing Study)

GSQI published research on using Bing's Sitemap Index Coverage Report to identify content quality issues that may not be visible through Google Search Console alone. The study demonstrated how Bing's more transparent indexation feedback can reveal content problems that affect visibility across search engines.

Bing's Quality Signals

Unlike Google Search Console, Bing Webmaster Tools provides explicit reasons why URLs are excluded from the index. The Sitemap Index Coverage Report shows categories including "Low Quality" and "Content Not Valuable Enough," providing direct feedback that Google doesn't offer. This transparency makes Bing valuable for content quality auditing even if Google is your primary traffic source.

The research found that URLs flagged as low quality by Bing often showed correlating issues in Google: low impressions, indexation problems, or poor rankings. While the search engines use different algorithms, both evaluate content quality, and Bing's explicit feedback can identify issues affecting both platforms.

Audit Methodology

The recommended approach: submit your sitemap to Bing Webmaster Tools if not already done, allow time for Bing to crawl and evaluate pages, then review the Index Coverage Report for pages marked as low quality or not valuable. Export this list and cross-reference against Google Search Console performance data for the same URLs.

Pages flagged by Bing but performing well in Google may indicate Bing-specific issues. Pages flagged by Bing that also underperform in Google likely have genuine quality problems worth addressing. The correlation analysis helps prioritize which flagged URLs deserve attention.

Common Issues Identified

The study identified patterns in Bing-flagged content: thin pages with minimal unique content, duplicate or near-duplicate content across multiple URLs, pages with high template-to-content ratios (lots of boilerplate, little unique text), and pages that may have been created for SEO purposes without providing user value.

Addressing these issues often improved performance in both Bing and Google. The improvements validate that while algorithms differ, fundamental content quality concepts apply across search engines. Quality improvements for one engine tend to benefit all.

Limitations

Bing's evaluation criteria don't perfectly predict Google's assessment. Some content Google rewards may be flagged by Bing, and vice versa. Use Bing's feedback as one input to content audits rather than definitive quality judgment. Combine with Google Search Console data, traffic analysis, and editorial review for comprehensive quality assessment.

Source: GSQI