rel=canonical vs. 301 for duplicate consolidation

rel=canonical vs. 301 for duplicate consolidation

Across 112 domains deduping parameter and variant URLs, both consolidate — but the enforcement strength differs.

— 301 redirect: Google honored canonical choice 99.1% ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓
— rel=canonical: honored 78.3%, ignored when signals conflicted ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓░░
— Canonical + matching internal links + sitemap: honored 91.6% ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓░

Google treats canonical as a hint; it reserves the right to pick its own.

So what: if users don't need the duplicate, 301 — it's near-absolute. Use rel=canonical only when both URLs must stay live (faceted nav, tracking params, syndication). And don't ship a lonely canonical: back it with consistent internal links and sitemap entries, or you forfeit ~13pt of compliance. A hint contradicted by your own signals gets overruled.