Single Websites vs Multiple Websites: An SEO Strategy for Multi-Local Businesses

A client came to me with a seemingly-innocuous question, "Should we launch a separate domain for each of our office locations, or should we keep a single, branded domain?" 

This is an incredibly common point of confusion for local businesses with multiple office locations. In some cases, the business is single-location, but they offer multiple types of products and services, and wonder whether a single or multiple website SEO strategy is right for them.

Context: This client had purchased an exact-match keyword domain in 2010, before Google had rolled out its EMD update that disallowed sites from ranking on the basis of the keywords in their domain alone. The site they purchased had their city and main service in it (the term they wanted to rank for most), and not surprisingly, they ranked nearly overnight. It was upon this past experience that they were certain if they did the same thing again and purchased another geo+service EMD, they would rank instantly. I was advocating for a single, branded domain. Below are the contents of my response to their question. 


  • STRONGER BRAND ASSOCIATION. Searchers often make selections from the search engine results pages (SERPs) based on their familiarity bias. In other words, they are likely to select the URL of a brand they recognize and trust. While having keywords in your domain can be helpful, it doesn't distinguish you as much from your competition as brand mentions would. I personally like a mix of brand and keywords. For example, if I Googled “best vegan donuts” and one of the search results was, I might be more inclined to click on that over (if I wasn’t familiar with the brand, keywords help me trust it for relevance’s sake). 

  • CONSISTENT USER EXPERIENCE. User experience can be cleaner on a single domain. In order to get all the information about your business (i.e. both areas served /  both offices), a user wouldn’t have to navigate off-site with a single domain, whereas they would with a multi-domain strategy.

  • DOMAIN AUTHORITY. Orlando, as a new office, would benefit from latching onto the authority of the main site in a single-domain strategy. Whereas launching Orlando on a new domain would mean starting out with no authority and no backlinks, launching Orlando attached to the main site would mean starting out already with authority and backlinks.  

  • MESSAGING. Because the content on each domain must be unique, we couldn’t share any messaging between the two. A single site would offer the benefit of not having to rewrite non-city specific pages such as the home page, about us page, and attorney pages.  

  • GEO-SPECIFIC EXPERIENCES. With a single domain, we can still customize city-specific sections to offer unique user experiences. For example, could have an entirely unique message that distinguishes itself from

  • SINGLE V. DIVIDED EFFORTS. Authority is a domain-based factor, and as such, doesn’t transfer well through indirect relationships with other websites. With a single-domain strategy, we wouldn’t have to divide our efforts attracting authority links separately for each domain.

  • FUTURE-PROOFING. A single domain is more future proof. If you added more offices in the future, it’d be fairly simple to add new pages to an already-established domain, whereas going with a multi-domain strategy would mean having to launch a brand new website every time another office opens in order to remain consistent.


  • DISTINCT CAMPAIGNS. This strategy could be beneficial if you wanted a less holistic organic presence, preferring to keep the Orlando organic campaign separate altogether from the Tallahassee organic campaign.

  • GEO CONSISTENCY. Although you could offer a custom, city-specific experience with subpages on a single domain, you may be able to address your visitors more personally with separate domains.

    • There would be less confusion over which pages to cater to which locale. The entire Orlando site would be optimized for Orlando, while the entire Tallahassee site would be optimized for Tallahassee. Whereas with a single domain, we would be selecting some “shared” pages (that don’t belong to either office) to have more generic geo optimization like “Florida.”

  • CITATIONS CONSISTENCY. While we can set up citations to go to their appropriate subpage on the site (ex: Orlando citations pointing to the page) it is common for some backlinks to go to the home page. If the location “home” pages are located on subpages, some of the backlinks may go to a geo-neutral page (true home page) rather than a location-specific page.

So what did the client end up choosing? While they originally agreed to go with our recommendation of a single, branded domain, a botched HTTPS migration caused them to get cold feed and request that we revert their domain back to its original EMD name and launch a separate domain for their newest location. The topic of site migrations warrants a whole post (or book) unto itself, so we’ll table that for another time.

If you enjoyed this, check out my Whiteboard Friday on Moz: The Goal-Based Approach to Domain Selection! It was largely inspired by questions like this.

I’d also highly recommend checking out Not-Actually-the-Best Local SEO Practices by Miriam Ellis. In it is one of the best arguments against a multi-domain strategy that I’ve ever read, and it uses a TV dinner analogy to do it (which makes it even better). Please check it out. It will help you make better sense of this local business conundrum.