Generic anchors vs. branded anchors: "click here" is not filler

Generic anchors vs. branded anchors: "click here" is not filler

Generic anchors ("click here", "read more", "this site") are often dismissed as wasted, low-value links. In distribution terms they serve a specific purpose that branded anchors cannot, and the two should not be substituted carelessly.

Generic anchors are the strongest signal of editorial, unincentivized linking. No SEO optimizes "click here" — so its presence reads as a human writing naturally. A profile with a healthy generic-anchor share looks demonstrably organic.

Branded anchors signal entity recognition but are also the anchor an SEO would build if they were trying to look safe. A profile that is suspiciously all-branded with zero generics can read as deliberately constructed.

The tactic: generic anchors are the camouflage layer. They cost you keyword relevance (they transmit none) but they buy authenticity that pure branded profiles lack.

On one hand, generics waste relevance potential. On the other, their over-optimization risk is the lowest of any category, and their absence is itself anomalous.

Limitation: "expected" generic-anchor share varies wildly by content type and is not benchmarked publicly at any reliable scale.

My lean: do not engineer generics, but never strip or avoid them. Their messiness is the signal.

Open question: is there an anomaly threshold where too few generic anchors flags a profile as constructed?