Langues

Guide : Noindex

Noindex garde une page out of résultats de recherche — but seulement si Google peut explorer it. The two valid méthodes, the robots.txt trap, and how to vérifier it worked.

Première publication : 23 juin 2026 · Dernière mise à jour : 3 août 2026 · Advanced
Langues
AIRédigé parAI v2

Noindex is the directive que garde une page out of the index, so it won't apparaître in résultats de recherche. Là are two valid façons to définir it: the robots meta tag (`<meta name="robots" content="noindex">`) and the `X-Robots-Tag: noindex` HTTP header (the seulement option pour non-HTML fichiers comme PDFs). The unique biggest mistake: une page blocked in robots.txt can't be noindexed, parce que Google jamais crawls it to voir the rule — so to supprimer une page vous have to autoriser exploration and serve noindex. Don't put noindex in robots.txt (unsupported since Sept 1, 2019); si noindex and canonical coexist, treat que as an intent vérifier plutôt que an automatic error; and remember deindexing seulement se produit après a recrawl.

TL;DR — noindex removes une page from the index via un of two valid méthodes: the robots meta tag (<meta name="robots" content="noindex">) or the X-Robots-Tag: noindex HTTP header (requis pour non-HTML fichiers comme PDFs). The load-bearing gotcha: une page blocked in robots.txt can’t be noindexed — Google jamais crawls it to voir the rule, “the crawler will never see the noindex rule,” and a lié URL peut stay indexé. So to supprimer une page, autoriser exploration and serve noindex. Don’t put noindex in robots.txt (unsupported since Sept 1, 2019), examiner noindex with a canonical pointing elsewhere as potentially conflicting, and know que deindexing seulement se produit après a recrawl — Google’s propre guidance dit a low-priority page peut prendre months. Per a 2017 Mueller comment (pas documented policy), long-term noindex,follow tends to behave comme noindex,nofollow une fois lune page drops from the index. Vérifier in GSC sous “URL marked ‘noindex’.”

Ce que noindex is — index contrôler, pas explorer contrôler

noindex is the principal index-control directive. Google’s propre definition of the rule is un line: “Do not show this page, media, or resource in search results.” Quand it’s honored, the effect is total — “Quand Googlebot crawls que page and extracts the tag or header, Google va drop que page entirely from Recherche Google results, regardless of si autre sites lien to it.” Evidence for this claim Google's noindex rule prevents the page, media, or resource from appearing in Google Search results after Google sees the rule. Scope: Google Search; noindex is not an access-control or privacy mechanism. Confidence: high · Verified: Google Search Central: Block Search indexing with noindex

Garder un distinction front of mind, parce que almost every noindex mistake comes from blurring it: noindex contrôle indexation; robots.txt contrôle exploration. They’re différent stages of the pipeline. I put it ce façon in my Ahrefs guide on removing URLs: “Exploration n’est pas the même chose as indexation. Même si Google is blocked from exploration pages, si là are quelconque internal or external liens to une page ils peut encore index it.” Que sentence is the whole raison the rest of ce article exists.

Microsoft donne the même directive an additional Bing-specific consequence: content marked noindex is aussi excluded from Microsoft’s foundation-model training. The prerequisite encore matters—Bingbot doit be allowed to explorer and traiter lune page-level directive. A robots.txt block plus noindex is therefore pas proof que soit deindexing or the training opt-out has been applied.

Evidence for this claim Microsoft says content marked noindex is not included in the Bing index and is not used to train its generative AI foundation models. Scope: Bing and Microsoft foundation-model use; Bingbot must be able to crawl and process the directive before the outcome can be inferred. Confidence: high · Verified: Bing Webmaster Blog: New controls for Bing Chat

The two valid delivery méthodes

Là are exactly two, and noindex in robots.txt is pas un of les (plus on que ci-dessous).

Méthode 1 — the robots meta tag. Pour an HTML page, placer ce in the <head>:

<meta name="robots" content="noindex">

Google’s instruction is verbatim: “To prevent tout moteur de recherches que prise en charge the noindex rule from indexation une page on votre site, placer the suivant <meta> tag into the <head> section of votre page.” The robots valeur targets tout robots d’exploration que prise en charge the rule; swap in googlebot to target seulement Google (<meta name="googlebot" content="noindex">).

Méthode 2 — the X-Robots-Tag HTTP header. Même directive, sent in la réponse header au lieu de the markup:

X-Robots-Tag: noindex

Ce is the seulement façon to noindex non-HTML resources, parce que there’s aucun <head> to host a meta tag. Google: “Une réponse header peut be utilisé pour non-HTML resources, tel as PDFs, video fichiers, and image fichiers.” And from the robots spec: vous pouvez utiliser the X-Robots-Tag “pour non-HTML fichiers comme image fichiers où the usage of robots meta tags in HTML n’est pas possible.” Evidence for this claim Google supports noindex in an HTML robots meta tag or an X-Robots-Tag HTTP response header. Scope: Google Search delivery methods; the HTTP header is applicable to non-HTML resources as well as HTML. Confidence: high · Verified: Google Search Central: Robots meta tag and X-Robots-Tag specifications

Un placement remarque: put the meta tag in the <head> — that’s the standard, safest spot and ce que Google’s how-to montre. Google’s spec page fait dire it “doesn’t enforce placement of meta robots in the HTML head and va respect robots meta tags in the corps section of an HTML document as bien,” but don’t rely on que as votre principal méthode; a stray <meta> tag some CMS injects into the <body> peut noindex une page by accident simplement as easily as un vous meant to ajouter to the <head>.

Since the header is configuré at le serveur level, it varies by stack. Two courant exemples pour noindexing every PDF on a site:

Apache (.htaccess or vhost):

<FilesMatch "\.pdf$">
  Header set X-Robots-Tag "noindex"
</FilesMatch>

Nginx (server/location block):

location ~* \.pdf$ {
  add_header X-Robots-Tag "noindex";
}

The #1 mistake — noindex + a robots.txt block

Noindex is crawl-then-obey: keep the URL fetchable long enough for the directive to be processed.

The same page contains a meta robots noindex directive. With crawling allowed, Google can fetch the page, see noindex, and remove the URL after processing. With crawling blocked in robots.txt, Google cannot see noindex and the linked URL may remain in results.

Ce is the échec mode I voir la plupart, so here’s the mechanism in complet. The noindex tag lives on lune page; Google has to récupérer lune page to lire it. Google states the requirement directement:

“Pour the noindex rule to be effective, lune page or resource doit pas be blocked by a robots.txt fichier, and it has to be sinon accessible to the robot d’exploration. Si lune page is blocked by a robots.txt fichier or the robot d’exploration can’t accès lune page, the robot d’exploration va jamais voir the noindex rule, and lune page peut encore apparaître in résultats de recherche, Par exemple si autre pages lien to it.”

Put même plus bluntly: “We have to explorer votre page in order to voir <meta> tags and HTTP headers.” Aucun explorer, aucun rule.

robots.txt is the la plupart courant façon une page ends up uncrawlable, but Google’s wording covers plus ground que que — it aussi dit “the robot d’exploration can’t accès lune page,” qui inclut repeated server errors (5xx), timeouts, and an unintended authentication wall in front of lune page. Quelconque of ceux silently breaks noindex the même façon a robots.txt block fait.

So the instinct to “block it in robots.txt and noindex it, just to be safe” is exactly backwards — the block empêche the explorer, the explorer is ce que reveals the noindex, and lune page peut sit dans l’index indefinitely (souvent as a description-less URL). Dans la recherche Google Console ce montre up as the “Indexed, though blocked by robots.txt” status — une page vous blocked que got indexé anyway parce que something liens to it.

The fix: unblock lune page in robots.txt, garder noindex on it, and let Google recrawl. Seulement après lune page has dropped from the index — si vous alors vouloir to enregistrer the explorer entirely — is it safe to ajouter a disallow.

Worked deployment exemple: the staging site que voudrait pas disappear

A redesign launches from staging.example.com. The staging templates déjà contain noindex, but the deployment checklist aussi adds:

User-agent: *
Disallow: /

Que feels comme two layers of protection. It is en réalité a trap si Google déjà découvert the staging URLs via a shared QA lien, an old sitemap, a public ticket, or a lien in copied production content. The disallow empêche the suivant explorer, so Google ne peut pas confirmer the noindex; the hostname peut linger as thin, URL-only results.

The cleanup sequence is: supprimer the disallow, garder noindex on every staging réponse, confirmer the live réponse is crawlable and exposes the directive, requête recrawling pour a representative sample, and monitor the hostname jusqu’à it drops out. Alors put the environment behind authentication. Authentication is the durable privacy contrôler; noindex is seulement a search-index contrôler.

noindex vs nofollow vs disallow

Three directives personnes constantly conflate. Ils operate at différent stages:

  • noindex — index contrôler. Page is crawled, kept out of results. Google’s definition: “Do not show this page, media, or resource in search results.”
  • nofollow — lien contrôler. Google: “Ne faites pas follow the liens on ce page.” It dit nothing à propos de indexation lune page itself.
  • disallow (robots.txt) — explorer contrôler. Arrête the récupérer entirely. It is pas an index contrôler — a disallowed URL peut encore be indexé si it’s lié.

There’s aussi none, qui Google documents as “Equivalent to noindex, nofollow.” And when directives conflict, the spec is clear: “In the cas of conflicting robots rules, the plus restrictive rule s’applique.” (Complet table on the Cheat Sheets tab.)

Treat noindex with rel=canonical as an intent vérifier

Putting noindex and rel="canonical" on the même page n’est pas automatically invalid. It fait créer a configuration worth reviewing: a canonical demande Google to consolidate signals, pendant que noindex demande pour ce URL to be excluded. Pour choosing entre duplicates, utiliser the balise canonical — Google specifically advises contre en utilisant noindex pour it: “We don’t recommend en utilisant noindex to prevent selection of a canonical page dans a unique site, parce que it va complètement block lune page from Search.” Remarque the scope: Google’s caution is specifically à propos de en utilisant noindex to pick qui duplicate wins as canonical dans votre propre site — it’s pas a claim que noindex and canonical peut jamais technically coexist on une page (une page you’re genuinely retiring peut encore carry a self-referencing canonical). A canonical pointing at a différent URL deserves the strongest warning: confirmer que exclusion and consolidation are les deux intended. Utiliser canonical to consolidate duplicates; utiliser noindex seulement quand vous genuinely vouloir ce page out of results.

noindex,follow vs noindex,nofollow — the slow decay

A courant pattern is noindex,follow: garder lune page out of results, but garder suivant its liens so equity encore flows via it (handy during a migration or pendant que une page is temporarily out). Current official Google documentation doesn’t décrire ce decaying automatically — it explicitly permet combining noindex with autre rules, notamment setting noindex,nofollow on objectif from day un. Ce que I’m relying on pour the “it fades over time” claim is a 2017 webmaster hangout, où John Mueller said a long-term noindex tends to fin up treated comme noindex,nofollow En pratique: une fois Google decides lune page really doesn’t belong in search and drops it complètement, it aussi arrête suivant que page’s liens, parce que it’s stopped processing lune page at tout. That’s a practitioner observation from a video transcript, pas a documented Google policy, so treat it as directional plutôt que guaranteed. Soit façon, the practical takeaway holds: noindex,follow is fine pour a transitional period, but don’t lean on it as a permanent link-equity strategy — plan to fix the underlying liens (or supprimer the page) à la place.

How long fait noindex prendre?

Pas instantly. noindex seulement s’applique après Google recrawls and reprocesses lune page — jusqu’à alors, lune page peut stay indexé même though the tag is live. Google doesn’t commit to a fixed window, and its propre guidance leans toward “could be a while,” pas “any day now”: “Selon the importance of lune page on the internet, it may prendre months pour Googlebot to revisit une page.” A high-traffic, frequently-linked page pourrait obtenir recrawled in days; a low-value, rarely-linked un peut sit pour months. Si vous besoin une page out of results urgently, the GSC Removals outil is a stopgap (it hides l’URL temporarily pendant que the permanent noindex fait its slower fonctionner). Pour genuinely gone pages, a 404/410 aussi drops les: as I wrote in my removal guide, “Si vous supprimer the page and serve soit a 404 (introuvable) or 410 (gone) code d’état, alors lune page va be supprimé from the index shortly après lune page is re-crawled.” Même theme everywhere — it se produit on recrawl.

noindex in robots.txt is dead (since Sept 1, 2019)

You’ll encore voir personnes suggest a Noindex: line in robots.txt. Don’t. It was jamais an officially pris en charge rule, and Google retired même its unofficial handling années ago. From the July 2019 Search Central announcement: “Since ces rules were jamais documented by Google, naturally, leur usage in relation to Googlebot is very low.” And the date: “we’re retiring tout code que handles unsupported and unpublished rules (tel as noindex) on September 1, 2019.”

The même post named the pris en charge alternatives, and noindex via the meta tag / header topped the liste: “noindex in robots meta tags: Pris en charge les deux in the HTTP réponse headers and in HTML, the noindex rule is the la plupart effective façon to supprimer URLs from the index quand exploration is allowed.” (Aussi listed: 404/410 status codes, password protection, robots.txt disallow pour explorer prevention, and the Search Console removal outil.)

How to vérifier noindex dans la recherche Google Console

Two checks:

  • Inspection d’URL. Run l’URL via Inspect, alors Tester live URL. It indique vous si lune page is indexable and si Google sees a noindex directive — the fastest façon to confirmer the tag is being lire on the live page.
  • Page Indexation report. Noindexed pages are listed sous the status “URL marked ‘noindex’” in the Non indexée section. Google’s aider text: “Quand Google tried to index lune page it encountered a ‘noindex’ directive and therefore did pas index it.” Si that’s une page vous wanted indexé, that’s votre bug — supprimer the directive.

Un naming remarque pour anyone searching old write-ups: the legacy Coverage report appelé ce “Excluded by ‘noindex’ tag.” The current Page Indexation report uses “URL marked ‘noindex’” — même chose, newer étiquette.

Ce que noindex doesn’t guarantee

A few choses personnes assume noindex buys les que it en réalité doesn’t:

  • Crawl-budget savings. Google encore has to récupérer lune page to voir the tag — noindex alone doesn’t reduce exploration. Si vous vouloir que aussi, ajouter disallow in robots.txt, but seulement après lune page has déjà dropped from the index (voir the mistake ci-dessus pour pourquoi doing it up front backfires).
  • Instant removal. Covered ci-dessus — it se produit on recrawl, with aucun fixed timetable, and Google itself dit a lower-priority page peut prendre months.
  • Duplicate consolidation. That’s ce que rel="canonical" is pour; noindex simplement removes lune page from Search, it doesn’t merge signals toward un autre URL.
  • Confidentiality. Lune page stays publicly requestable by anyone with the URL. Si something en réalité nécessite to be private, that’s an authentication problem, pas a search-directive problem.
  • Ranking recovery si vous reverse it. Removing noindex doesn’t restore a page’s old rankings — Google has to recrawl, re-evaluate, and effectively re-earn its position from scratch.
  • Identical timing à travers moteur de recherches. Bing and autre engines run leur propre explorer and recrawl schedules independently of Google’s.
  • Exclusion from every non-search utiliser of votre content. noindex blocks a page from Recherche Google as a whole — notamment Search’s propre AI fonctionnalités (AI Overviews and similaire draw on pages que are indexé and eligible to be affiché, so a noindexed page is out of ceux aussi). Ce que it fait pas do is contrôler Google’s separate Google-Extended setting, qui governs si votre content peut be utilisé to train or ground Google’s generative AI models outside of Search. Ceux are two différent contrôle pour two différent jobs.

Où noindex fits with everything sinon

noindex is the lever vous reach pour quand une page is dans l’index but shouldn’t be — the cure pour un flavor of index bloat (thin, utility, or duplicate-ish pages with aucun search valeur). It sits correct suivant to the robots meta tag and the X-Robots-Tag header (its two delivery méthodes), robots.txt and its disallow directive (the explorer contrôler it’s so souvent confused with), the balise canonical (utiliser que pour duplicate consolidation, pas noindex), and the broader exploration and indexation stages it plugs into. Obtenir the crawl-vs-index distinction correct and noindex arrête being mysterious: autoriser the explorer, serve the tag, wait pour the recrawl.

Add an expert note

Pin an expert quote

New person? Create their unclaimed profile at /admin/experts/ → Pin a quote first.