About
A practical directory for people who need backlink opportunities without the usual fog.
Backlink Badger exists because backlink research is still too full of half-useful lists, recycled advice, and provider pages that hide the part you actually care about.
The site is a working directory of places where a project can earn, submit, publish, cite, or place a backlink. It is meant for SEO practitioners, GEO and AI visibility specialists, founders, and content operators who need to move from research to action.
The goal is not to make every provider look good. The goal is to make the tradeoffs visible enough that you can decide what belongs on your shortlist.
Why this exists
Backlink sourcing should be less performative
Most backlink research starts with a pile of tabs and ends with a shrug. Some providers are profile links. Some are marketplaces. Some are publications with real editorial friction. Some are paid listings dressed up as opportunities.
Backlink Badger puts those differences closer to the surface: what kind of link you can expect, how hard it is to get, whether there is a free path, and what might make the attempt a waste of time.
Find the path
Each provider should answer a practical question: where can a marketer, founder, or SEO operator actually place a link?
Surface the catch
Free does not always mean useful. Dofollow does not always mean safe. The directory calls out friction, moderation, cost, and risk.
Keep it sortable
Authority, spam score, difficulty, time, and link type help turn a long list into a short action plan.
Built for a stricter community list
Community submissions matter, but volume is not the scoreboard. A messy list helps nobody.
What belongs here
Providers with a clear backlink mechanism: profiles, directories, marketplaces, publications, product pages, resources, support pages, or contribution paths where a useful link can reasonably exist.
What gets challenged
Thin directories, unverifiable claims, suspicious paid placements, and anything that looks like it was built to sell link volume instead of creating a defensible citation.
How a row is built
Every provider row carries the same six signals
A row is only worth scanning if it answers the same questions for every provider. These are the fields behind each entry, shown here in the format they publish in. Every one is an editorial estimate, and every one carries its methodology on hover.
- Link type Set after checking whether the recommended backlink method on a provider typically outputs a dofollow link in the page HTML. Where attributes vary by page type, we use the realistic default and explain the nuance in the guide.
- Dofollow Nofollow
Whether the recommended path typically outputs a link that can pass equity.
- Authority Domain Authority where a defensible value exists, otherwise a conservative Backlink Badger editorial estimate. An approximate comparison number, not a live measurement.
- 0–100
Scored on the backlink surface itself, not the provider’s homepage.
- Spam Spam score where we have a defensible value for the relevant domain or surface, otherwise a conservative editorial estimate from platform quality and spam patterns. A comparison guide, not a guarantee.
- 0–100
Lower is better. Zero-padded so columns stay comparable at a glance.
- Difficulty Assigned from editorial review of the recommended path. An approximate comparison estimate, not a measured metric.
- 0–100
Signup friction, content requirements, approval gates, and account trust.
- Time The minimum minutes a prepared user needs end to end, including waiting steps we can reasonably predict. Your first attempt may take longer.
- 45m
Minutes a prepared user needs to sign up, set up, and publish.
- Cost Marked free when the recommended backlink path can be completed without paying the provider for access, placement, or a required plan. If only paid tiers unlock the link, it is marked paid.
- Free Paid
Whether the recommended path can be completed without paying for access.
Backlinks are one signal, not the whole job
The directory does not pretend links solve content quality, relevance, technical SEO, or product-market fit. It helps with one job: finding backlink paths worth investigating. Within that job, three things decide whether a path is worth your afternoon.
- Backlinks still matter
- Search engines and AI answer systems both lean on public signals of authority, citation, and reputation.
- Quality beats volume
- A useful backlink path has relevance, editorial context, and a reasonable risk profile. A pile of weak links is busywork.
- The details decide
- Dofollow status, moderation, placement effort, and spam risk change whether a provider is worth trying.
Help keep the list useful
Send providers, corrections, caveats, and screenshots. The best submissions make the next operator's decision faster and less sloppy.
Looking for information about why todoist.com and todoi.com are not the same thing?