Redirect Audit: When to Use a 301 vs a 302

Redirects look like plumbing. Invisible when they work, expensive when they leak. The 301-versus-302 choice is the classic slow leak: nothing breaks visibly, but authority quietly fails to arrive where you need it.

The difference in one paragraph

A 301 says “moved permanently”: search engines transfer the old page’s authority to the new URL and eventually replace it in the index. A 302 says “moved temporarily”: engines keep the old URL indexed and hold authority there, waiting for the page to come back. Browsers also cache 301s aggressively. Permanent means permanent.

When each one is right

Use a 301 for URL structure changes, domain migrations, deleted content pointing to its replacement, and consolidating duplicates. This should be your default. Most redirects are, in fact, permanent decisions.

Use a 302 for genuinely temporary situations: an A/B test, a seasonal landing page, a product briefly out of stock pointing at its category. If you cannot name the date the redirect ends, it is not temporary. Make it a 301.

The audit: three questions per redirect

First, are there 302s that have quietly become permanent? A “temporary” redirect from a 2024 migration is a 301 wearing the wrong label, leaking authority every day. Second, do you have chains? A links to B links to C. Each hop wastes crawl budget and dilutes signal. Point A directly at C. Third, do any redirects land on 404s? A redirect to a dead page is worse than no redirect at all.

Make it a monitor, not a project

Redirects rot as content changes, so a one-time cleanup buys you a clean slate that immediately starts aging. This is why SEO & Chill ships a 404 monitor that suggests where to send each old link and fixes it in one click, and adds the redirect itself when you change the address of a post or page. The audit becomes a standing check instead of an annual archaeology dig. However you run it, put it on a schedule. Plumbing needs inspection, not faith.