For rankings, no. rel="sponsored" exists specifically to tell Google that money or goods changed hands, so no link equity is passed. They are still worth buying when the placement sends real referral traffic or puts you in front of the right audience. Judge a sponsored link as advertising, never as a backlink.
What rel="sponsored" is, and who applies it
Google introduced rel="sponsored" on 10 September 2019, alongside rel="ugc" and the long-standing rel="nofollow".
<a href="https://yoursite.com" rel="sponsored">a paid or affiliate link</a>
The publisher applies it, not you. That matters more than it sounds: when you pay for a placement, the tag on the finished link is entirely the publisher's decision, and you often will not see it until the post goes live. Reputable publishers apply it as policy. Sellers of "guest posts" and "niche edits" usually do not, and that absence is the product they are actually selling.
Per Google's link spam policies, "buying or selling links for ranking purposes" is link spam, and the remedy is qualifying paid links with sponsored or nofollow. Affiliate links are compensated links too, so the same logic applies to them.
What it is worth, honestly
Split the question in two, because "worth anything" hides two different currencies.
As a ranking signal: nothing you can plan around
Since September 2019 Google has treated all three link attributes as hints rather than absolute directives, which means a sponsored link is not guaranteed to be discarded. But Google has never said how often it decides otherwise, and there is no way to observe it from outside. Any link building plan that depends on a sponsored link secretly counting is built on a coin flip you cannot see.
As advertising: sometimes a great deal
A sponsored placement in a newsletter your buyers actually read, or a review on a site that owns the "best X for Y" query, can be the cheapest qualified traffic you will find. The link is not the asset. The audience is.
| What you might want | Does a sponsored link deliver it? |
|---|---|
| Higher rankings for a target page | No, that is what the tag prevents |
| Referral clicks from a relevant audience | Yes, if the placement is genuinely read |
| Brand exposure to a new audience | Yes |
| Being discovered and crawled | Possibly: the URL can still be found through other links and sitemaps |
| Being named in AI answers | Indirectly, via visibility rather than the link |
| Domain authority growth | No |
If you are buying a link for the SEO, you are buying the wrong thing. If you are buying an ad and the link comes attached, the maths is ordinary advertising maths: cost per qualified visitor.
Where you will meet sponsored links
These are the placements where the tag should appear.
Paid guest posts and sponsored articles
Publisher sites with a disclosure policy tag these as standard.
Affiliate links
Any link that pays the publisher a commission is a compensated link.
Newsletter and podcast sponsorships
The sponsor often gets a link on the web archive page of the issue or episode.
Product gifting
A free unit in exchange for a review is a material connection even with no cash involved.
Directory listings with a paid tier
This one is a common trap. Paying a directory specifically to convert a nofollowed listing into a followed one is buying a link, plainly. Are business directory listings worth it covers which ones justify the fee on other grounds.
The disclosure obligation is not only Google's
Two separate rule sets apply, and people conflate them.
Google's rules are about search: mark paid links so they do not distort rankings. The cost of ignoring them is a manual action or an algorithmic devaluation.
Consumer protection law is about the reader. In the United States, the FTC's Endorsement Guides, last revised in 2023, require a material connection between an endorser and a brand (cash, free product, or anything else of value) to be disclosed clearly and conspicuously. Regulators elsewhere, such as the UK's CMA, take a similar line. This obligation sits on the publisher, but a brand that pressures publishers to hide paid placements is buying itself a second kind of problem.
The practical version: a paid placement should be visibly labelled to humans and tagged for machines. Doing one without the other is half a disclosure.
What happens when the tag is missing
This is where sponsored links get genuinely risky, and it is worth being precise about who carries the risk.
Google's spam policy names both sides: "buying or selling links." In practice, the site with the more obvious footprint tends to attract attention first; a publisher running dozens of untagged paid posts leaves a much clearer pattern than any single buyer. But the buyer is not immune, and the buyer has no control over the seller's behaviour.
The realistic failure mode is not a dramatic penalty, though. It is quieter: the link gets algorithmically discounted, you paid for a ranking signal you never received, and nothing in your reporting tells you that happened. That silent outcome is far more common than a manual action, and it is a large part of why is it worth paying for backlinks generally answers no.
sponsored vs nofollow vs ugc, in one table
| Attribute | Says | Correct use |
|---|---|---|
rel="sponsored" |
Money or goods changed hands | Ads, paid posts, affiliate links, gifted reviews |
rel="ugc" |
A user added this, not the publisher | Comments, forum posts, member profiles |
rel="nofollow" |
Do not pass ranking signals, no reason given | Catch-all; still valid for paid links |
| No attribute | The publisher editorially endorses this | Earned in-content links |
Google's guide to qualifying outbound links says nofollow "is still an acceptable way to flag" paid links, though sponsored is preferred, and that multiple rel values can be combined (rel="sponsored nofollow"). The deeper mechanics are in dofollow vs nofollow links and do UGC-tagged links pass value.
How to check what you actually bought
It takes thirty seconds, before you pay the invoice or after the post goes live:
- Open the live page and find your link.
- Right-click it and choose Inspect.
- Read the
<a>tag. Anyrelvalue is sitting right there.
Do this again a month later. A placement that shipped clean can be re-tagged later when the publisher tidies up its disclosure policy, which is one more reason not to build a ranking plan on rented links.
A better use of the same budget
Set the options side by side. A sponsored placement on an industry site often costs more than a whole month of content, for a link whose ranking value is deliberately switched off; our page on the average cost of a backlink has the ranges. Spend that on a writer instead and you own an asset that keeps earning links, or spend nothing at all and trade for placements.
We make Backlinkster, which matches site owners for one-for-one in-content swaps on related sites, and each swap is verified by API. Free accounts get five swaps a month, and the paid plans start at $19. No money touches the link itself, which keeps it outside the definition of a paid link.
Frequently asked questions
Do rel="sponsored" links pass link equity?
No, by design. The attribute tells Google the link was paid for, so ranking signals are withheld. Google calls link attributes hints rather than strict directives, but there is no observable exception you can plan around.
Is rel="sponsored" better than rel="nofollow" for paid links?
Slightly, in that it is more accurate. Google accepts either for paid links and says sponsored is preferred. Publishers do not need to change existing nofollow tags.
Do sponsored links hurt my site?
A properly tagged sponsored link does not hurt you. The risk comes from paid links that are not tagged, which count as link spam under Google's policies and can trigger a manual action or a silent devaluation.
Do affiliate links need rel="sponsored"?
They should carry it, because the publisher is paid when you click. US publishers also carry an FTC disclosure obligation to the reader.
Are sponsored links worth buying for traffic?
They can be. Evaluate the placement the way you would any ad: expected qualified clicks against cost. If the sums only work when you count the link as an SEO asset, they do not work.
Can I ask a publisher to remove the sponsored tag?
You can ask, and some will. Understand what you are asking for: a paid link presented as an editorial one, which is exactly the pattern Google's link spam policies describe. You are buying risk on someone else's site, with no control over how long it stays there.
Does Google still crawl sponsored links?
Google says links with these attributes "will generally not be followed," but the target page can still be found through sitemaps or other links. Since 1 March 2020 Google has also treated nofollow as a hint for crawling and indexing.
The bottom line
rel="sponsored" is doing exactly what it says: separating advertising from endorsement. Treat a tagged link as an ad and judge it on traffic, and some placements are genuinely good buys. Treat it as a backlink and you will overpay for a signal that was never sent. And the one move that would turn a sponsored link into a ranking asset, getting the tag removed, is also the move that makes it a liability the moment Google works it out.
Related: Dofollow vs nofollow links · Do UGC-tagged links pass value? · Is it worth paying for backlinks? · What to avoid when building backlinks · What is a manual action in Search Console? · Is Fiverr Link Building Safe?