Editorial vs directory backlinks: what `rel` actually says in 2026 (and what answer engines can cite)

I curled a few public listing pages this morning (5 Nov 2026, IST). On SaaSHub's Notion page, the green Visit website button is literally:

<a href="https://www.notion.com/" rel="nofollow" ...>Visit website</a>

Same pattern on SaaSHub's Figma page (rel="nofollow" on https://www.figma.com). On Open-Launch's homepage, the "Visit … website" product links I sampled used rel="noopener nofollow".

That is the directory side of this argument in one line: a lot of what gets sold as a "backlink" is a button a crawler is told not to treat as a normal endorsement.

What Google says the attributes mean

Google's Qualify outbound links doc (last updated 2025-12-10) is blunt:

• A normal editorial link you expect Google to fetch needs no rel attribute.
• rel="sponsored" — ads / paid placements.
• rel="ugc" — user-generated content (comments, forums).
• rel="nofollow" — when the others don't apply and you'd rather Google not associate your site with the destination (or not crawl it from that link).

You can combine values. Google treats these as hints, not a hard wall. Pages can still be found via sitemaps or other links. There is still no official rel="dofollow" — dofollow just means "no qualifying rel that marks it otherwise."

If someone sells you a dofollow directory link, open the live HTML. Spreadsheet status columns lie; the anchor does not.

What I saw on directories today

SaaSHub (Notion + Figma product pages, HTTP 200): product website CTAs use rel="nofollow". Other outbound rows on the same pages mix nofollow, ugc, and a few unqualified links that are not the Visit website button.

Open-Launch (homepage, HTTP 200): multiple product visit anchors like TubeAnalytics used rel="noopener nofollow".

BetaList (/startups/billdog, HTTP 200): messier, which is useful.

• The big Visit Site button points at an internal path (/startups/billdog/visit) without a rel on that button.
• That path 301s to the product URL with BetaList UTM params.
• Logo / image wrappers to the same /visit path do carry rel="noopener nofollow".
• A promo slot on the page used rel="nofollow sponsored".
• A bare product URL also appears in the description as a plain <a href="https://billdog.io/offers"> with no rel.

So BetaList is not "everything is nofollow." It is "check which anchor you actually got, and whether the crawlable hop is the button, the image wrapper, or a text URL." Product Hunt and AlternativeTo returned HTTP 403 to my curl from this box today, so I am not inventing those.

What an editorial body link looks like

I also opened a public Lede Press publication (one of the press sites I run). In the article body, the product name linked like this:

<a href="https://contractaura.com" rel="noopener noreferrer">Contract Aura</a>

noopener / noreferrer are browser / referrer hints. They are not nofollow, sponsored, or ugc. That matches what the press pages say on /editorial-backlinks and /pricing: one contextual link in the body, and the HTML does not use those three Google qualifying values. The sites also say, in plain words, that a published link does not promise a Google ranking or an answer-engine citation — only the page and the anchor you can open.

Same desk, different shape: a criteria-led shortlist with the product named in the text is the Listed Press version of that model (free if your site links back, or $29). I am disclosing that because it is mine — and because the point of this post is "open the HTML," not "trust the pitch deck."

Directory listings are still useful for humans, launch days, and referral traffic. They are a weak substitute when the thing you wanted was an in-sentence link on a readable URL.

What answer engines tend to need (without fake "ChatGPT cited X" tests)

I did not run a private ChatGPT session and then invent citations. Public docs are enough to stay honest:

• OpenAI documents OAI-SearchBot as the crawler for ChatGPT search features. Sites that opt out are not shown in ChatGPT search answers (they can still appear as navigational links).
• OpenAI's help article on web search says ChatGPT ranks results using multiple factors and that placement is not guaranteed. Eligibility starts with allowing the search bot and its published IPs.

So the practical bar is boring and checkable:

1. Is there a public URL a bot is allowed to fetch?
2. Can a parser read what the product is from the text (not only a logo wall)?
3. Is the product named in a sentence, with a normal in-body link, instead of only a "Visit" button behind nofollow?

That is closer to "what answer engines can cite" than another row in a directory spreadsheet. It still does not mean any given page will be cited.

Checklist you can run in five minutes

Pick one placement you already paid for or submitted to:

# fetch HTML
curl -sL -A "Mozilla/5.0" "https://EXAMPLE-LISTING-URL" -o page.html

# list outbound anchors + rel
grep -oE '<a[^>]+href="https?://[^"]+"[^>]*>' page.html | head -50

Or in DevTools → Elements: select the Visit / product link → look at rel.

Ask:

1. Is the product URL on a real <a href> in the first HTML response, or only after JS?
2. Does rel include nofollow, ugc, or sponsored?
3. Is the link in a sentence about the product, or only a button / logo?
4. Does the click go through a redirect hop (/visit, /out, tracking domain)? Check curl -sI on that hop.
5. Can you quote one line from the page that states what the product does?

I wrote a longer walkthrough of that check when there is how I check directory backlinks when there is no rel=dofollow — same idea, more of the failure modes.

If you want the opposite shape of page on purpose — readable body, one in-context link, URL you can re-check later — a longer decision explainer with one link in the body is the Piece Press version (again: mine; free if your site links back, or $29; dofollow as stated on the page, rankings not promised).

What actually counts

In 2026 I care about three things I can verify without a vendor dashboard:

• the live rel on the anchor that points at my URL
• whether a crawler gets usable text about the product on that URL
• whether I would still want the page if Google ignored the link tomorrow

Directories can win on distribution. Editorial pages win on "there is something to read and something to cite." Mixing them up in a backlink sheet is how you pay for buttons.

What's the last listing you paid for where you actually viewed source on the Visit button — and what did rel say?