efeskazakhstan.kz
Its Domain Power Rank is moderate.
- Global Rank
- #643,087
▲ 3,637,271
- Rank in TLD
- #400
▲ 3,024
- Referring Domains
- 32
－
- Avg. Referrer Power Rank
- 22.7
- Subdomains
- 2
- Domain age
- No data
Link Overview
- Avg. Referrer Power Rank
- 22.7
- Median Referrer Power Rank
- 21.2
- Referring Domains
- 32
- Linked Domains
- 12
Referring Domains by Power Rank
0–9 7
10–19 9
20–29 5
30–39 8
40–49 1
50–59 1
60–69 1
70–79 0
80–89 0
90–100 0
Total 32
Referring Domains
| Referring domain | Power Rank | Global Rank |
|---|---|---|
| untappd.com | 66.6 | #5,870 |
| anadoluefes.com | 55.9 | #36,260 |
| dknews.kz | 49.0 | #114,268 |
| rocketfirm.com | 38.7 | #581,080 |
| profitday.kz | 35.5 | #916,658 |
| ceeman.org | 35.4 | #930,311 |
| brookstonbeerbulletin.com | 35.2 | #960,089 |
| eurobak.kz | 34.4 | #1,105,947 |
| beststartup.asia | 33.3 | #1,323,648 |
| foodexpo.kz | 31.5 | #1,740,888 |
Basic Information
- TLD
- .kzKazakhstan
Subdomain
careers.efeskazakhstan.kzwww.efeskazakhstan.kz
DNS
| Type | Name | TTL | Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| A | efeskazakhstan.kz | 3600 | 185.98.5.224 |
| MX | efeskazakhstan.kz | 3600 | 10 mail.efeskazakhstan.kz |
| NS | efeskazakhstan.kz | 3600 | ns2.hoster.kz |
| NS | efeskazakhstan.kz | 3600 | ns3.hoster.kz |
| NS | efeskazakhstan.kz | 3600 | ns1.hoster.kz |
| SOA | efeskazakhstan.kz | 3600 | ns1.hoster.kz. v-40000.efeskazakhstan.kz. 2026092202 36000 3600 1360000 136 |
| TXT | efeskazakhstan.kz | 3600 | update_dns_zone |
| TXT | efeskazakhstan.kz | 3600 | v=spf1 include:_spf.hoster.kz ?all |
Email Authentication
- MX
- Warning
A mail server hostname could not be resolved to an IP address.
- SPF
- Warning
This SPF policy uses +all or has no all mechanism. Check whether the sender restrictions are appropriate, and consider ~all or -all if needed.
- DMARC
- Not configured
DMARC is not configured.
Some information is cached or comes from our own analysis, so it may not be current or complete. Our link analysis does not cover every link on the web. Metrics are based on our own methodology and should not be taken as definitive assessments of a domain’s or service’s quality or trustworthiness.