Technical
301 vs 302 redirects
Use 301 for anything permanent — it transfers ranking signals to the destination. Use 302 only for a genuinely temporary diversion such as an A/B test or a seasonal takeover, where you intend the original URL to return.
Side by side
| Compared on | 301 permanent | 302 temporary |
|---|---|---|
| Signals transferred | Yes, to the destination | Original URL keeps them |
| Which URL is indexed | The destination | Usually the original |
| Browser caching | Cached, sometimes aggressively | Not cached |
| Use for a migration | Yes | No |
| Use for a temporary campaign | No | Yes |
When 301 is the right choice
- Site migrations, domain changes and URL restructures
- A discontinued product redirecting to its replacement
- Consolidating two pages that were competing
- Forcing HTTPS and the canonical www variant
When 302 redirects is the right choice
- A/B tests where the original must keep its ranking
- A seasonal landing page that will revert
- Temporary maintenance diversions
- Geo-based routing where the original stays canonical
The caching consequence
Browsers cache 301s, sometimes for a long time. Deploying one by mistake and then removing it does not immediately fix things for anyone who already received it — which is a good reason to be certain before using one.
The rules that matter more than the code
One hop, never a chain. Redirect to the closest equivalent page rather than en masse to the home page, which is treated as a soft 404. And keep redirects for at least a year after a migration.
The verdict
Almost always 301. If you cannot name the date the original URL comes back, it is not temporary, and a 302 in that situation just delays the signal transfer you actually wanted.
If you want the full treatment
Migrating a site without losing what it took years to earn covers this in about 3 minutes — free, ungated, written from client work.
Who wrote this comparison
Anas Bin Masud builds e-commerce sites and does technical SEO for businesses in the UK, Canada and Pakistan. Where a comparison involves something I sell, the page says so — and every comparison here has to name at least two situations where each side wins, because a comparison one option always wins is an advert with a table in it.