What kinds of back links are considered the most powerful?

[biotechie]

backlinks that are permanent and comes from authority sites

[wqamar]

I think high pr and relevance niche are best backlinks

[mhuktar]

don't forget profile links, remember that link are still a link.

[cpa-money]

one way back links from related site, it doesnt metter if its blog, forum, website and etc

[technophobic]

Originally Posted by mhuktar

don't forget profile links, remember that link are still a link.

what if its a no follow link? is it powerful?

Relevance to the niche of your site is the most important in building back links.

and focus more to the quality of back links you build.

Focusing on quantity instead of quality—I’ve always said that I’d take 10 quality links over 100 bad ones every time. Sure, quantity does matter, but link building isn’t strictly a numbers game. If all your links are from low-grade websites, they won’t carry much weight, and much of your link building efforts will be wasted. Instead, focus on getting links from relevant, trusted websites.

[bluemind]

In my own opinion, backlinks have below features are considered the most powerful:
1. High PR
2. High relevant to your site
3. Few out link

[turf]

how do i know the site has authority even when its now .edu? or other extension?

[mjtaylor]

Originally Posted by WM-Scott

Not sure about most powerful, but if possible, they should be 'relevant' to your niche.

Relevance *is* necessary for a link to be powerful!

Originally Posted by makemoneyfree

I think it all depends on which site linking to your site. If you get one link from without PR site and another link from 2 PR site, then 2 PR site's link is more powerful.

Mmmm, well, I don't think that's a fair guide. If the site with no PR is relevant and the PR2 is not, guess what? I'd rather have the link from the unranked site.

Originally Posted by Puripong

You can estimate how powerful of links by looking at their autoritative status. The other factor is how editorial they are, the more editorial the more trust Google would give to that site. Type of link has a little to do but almost no different.

Ex1. - One link from Business.com directory is worth 1000x compared to 1,000 links from noname directory submission.

Ex2. - Links from your published articles in Ezinearticles.com is woth 100x compared to 1,000 links from garbage article directories.

Ex3 - One link from a "Big Name" company such as CNN.com, Whitehouse.gov, Digg.com, Harvard.edu is worth 10,000x compared to links from common sites with low trust.

Great post! Note that PageRank was never mentioned! There are other indications of quality that are probably far more reliable than Foolbar, I mean Toolbar PR.

Originally Posted by Voges12

I think signature on do follow forum is the ideal method for linking.It is much more easier to link from forum than any other interface.

I love forums. Clearly. But I don't really think they are a powerful link. Helpful, yes. Powerful? I am not so sure ... and you would think I might have enough to tell.

Originally Posted by Hafsoh

The most important thing is that links you get are related, quality inbound links definitely will help to get higher SERP, the factors that we look at as being the most important are link relevance and quality.

Tell us how you judge quality, please.

[nightcrawler]

Originally Posted by mjtaylor

Mmmm, well, I don't think that's a fair guide. If the site with no PR is relevant and the PR2 is not, guess what? I'd rather have the link from the unranked site.

But IMO if you do the calculations for calculating PR the PR2 link is considered more powerful. As long as that PR2 is not from bad neighbor hoods!

[Belinda]

Ones that send pre-sold traffic.

[Jasonvishva]

in my view i thank forum Signature links are most powerful. they index very fast...
no matter they are dofollow or not

[snicky]

Relevant link with authority might be best one.

[thebitbotdotcom]

High PR links from related sites that contain relevant keywords...preferably site-wide...

[lightingguru]

the most important thing is to comment on relevant sites that have good page rank

[mjtaylor]

Originally Posted by nightcrawler

But IMO if you do the calculations for calculating PR the PR2 link is considered more powerful. As long as that PR2 is not from bad neighbor hoods!

Maybe yes, maybe no. If we are talking toolbar PR okay ... but we know toolbar PR is worthless. At best an outdated reflection of where PR was in the past ... but if I am trying to get ranked for a term, and get traffic the relevant link is more powerful, IMO.

One of the reasons I believe we see so called "higher PR" sites outranked by "lower PR" sites is that there is so much more to it .. actual PageRank takes context and content of the source page into consideration if I am reading Google's new patent correctly: Ranking documents based on user behavior and/or feature data.

If poring over the patent is tedious, this analysis might be useful: http://www.seobythesea.com/?p=3806.

Originally Posted by thebitbotdotcom

High PR links from related sites that contain relevant keywords...preferably site-wide...

Site wide? I was under the impression that site wide links are a tip off to Google that it's a paid link? And that G filters those in such a way to devalue them.

[stephen.oliver]

1) related to your site & its content
2) high PR sites
3) authoritative site's such as news site, .gov, .edu sites

[Johnpeterr]

get the backlinks from the authoritative sites, such as .edu. org .gov sites