Dental SEO & Website Benchmarks: Fort Smith, AR
Live figures from 40 indexable audited Fort Smith dental practice websites, recomputed as practices are re-audited. Most recent audit September 19, 2026. Methodology dps-37-v1.
77
median score
+4.00 vs Arkansas median 73
73.55
average score
Arkansas average: 70.33
84.25
top quartile
the score the best 25% of local websites clear
40
websites audited
of 609 across Arkansas
Score distribution
Grade distribution in Fort Smith
Counts use all 40 indexable audited Fort Smith websites.
A
7.50%
3 of 40
B
30.00%
12 of 40
C
32.50%
13 of 40
D
12.50%
5 of 40
F
17.50%
7 of 40
Arkansas distribution: A 5% · B 28% · C 26% · D 18% · F 23% (609 websites).
Largest local difference first
Where Fort Smith dental websites fall short
“Not detected” means a signal was absent from the homepage and up to two linked pages in a bounded crawl; it does not prove the signal is absent everywhere on the site. Every percentage shows its own evaluated base; checks evaluated on fewer than 30 Fort Smith websites are omitted.
93%
FAQPage structured data not detected
37 of 40 evaluated Fort Smith websites — vs 96.22% across Arkansas.
93%
AggregateRating structured data not detected
37 of 40 evaluated Fort Smith websites — vs 93.60% across Arkansas.
85%
Service or treatment structured data not detected
34 of 40 evaluated Fort Smith websites — vs 92.94% across Arkansas.
| Check | Fort Smith rate | Arkansas rate | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| BreadcrumbList structured data not detectedStructured data | 50.00%20 of 40 evaluated | 68.14%415 of 609 evaluated | −18.14 pp |
| Emergency-services page not detectedPatient journey | 55.00%22 of 40 evaluated | 70.61%430 of 609 evaluated | −15.61 pp |
| Missing canonical tagsWebsite fundamentals | 20.00%8 of 40 evaluated | 35.47%216 of 609 evaluated | −15.47 pp |
| Dentist or LocalBusiness structured data not detectedStructured data | 35.00%14 of 40 evaluated | 45.98%280 of 609 evaluated | −10.98 pp |
| Insurance or payment page not detectedPatient journey | 50.00%20 of 40 evaluated | 59.93%365 of 609 evaluated | −9.93 pp |
| FAQ page not detectedPatient journey | 62.50%25 of 40 evaluated | 71.26%434 of 609 evaluated | −8.76 pp |
| Service or treatment structured data not detectedStructured data | 85.00%34 of 40 evaluated | 92.94%566 of 609 evaluated | −7.94 pp |
| XML sitemap not detectedWebsite fundamentals | 30.00%12 of 40 evaluated | 36.78%224 of 609 evaluated | −6.78 pp |
| Clear booking action not detectedPatient journey | 50.00%20 of 40 evaluated | 56.49%344 of 609 evaluated | −6.49 pp |
| Missing meta descriptionsWebsite fundamentals | 35.00%14 of 40 evaluated | 41.05%250 of 609 evaluated | −6.05 pp |
| Images missing alternative textWebsite fundamentals | 72.50%29 of 40 evaluated | 67.32%410 of 609 evaluated | +5.18 pp |
| Limited useful contentWebsite fundamentals | 47.50%19 of 40 evaluated | 43.02%262 of 609 evaluated | +4.48 pp |
| FAQPage structured data not detectedStructured data | 92.50%37 of 40 evaluated | 96.22%586 of 609 evaluated | −3.72 pp |
| Contact or inquiry form not detectedPatient journey | 70.00%28 of 40 evaluated | 73.40%447 of 609 evaluated | −3.40 pp |
| Privacy-policy link not detectedPatient journey | 47.50%19 of 40 evaluated | 49.43%301 of 609 evaluated | −1.93 pp |
| AggregateRating structured data not detectedStructured data | 92.50%37 of 40 evaluated | 93.60%570 of 609 evaluated | −1.10 pp |
| Unclear H1 structureWebsite fundamentals | 60.00%24 of 40 evaluated | 60.59%369 of 609 evaluated | −0.59 pp |
2026 US study baseline
The frozen national picture for the same checks
Rates from the 50,405-website 2026 US study cohort — a frozen study base that counts every audited domain, so it is a different denominator than the live evaluated figures above and the two must not be read as one series.
Dentist or LocalBusiness structured data not detected38.72%
Insurance or payment page not detected51.40%
Clear booking action not detected42.35%
Missing meta descriptions33.36%
Emergency-services page not detected58.40%
FAQ page not detected65.47%
Unclear H1 structure53.80%
Missing canonical tags26.14%
Limited useful content32.11%
Contact or inquiry form not detected68.70%
FAQPage structured data not detected95.57%
Images missing alternative text74.25%
XML sitemap not detected24.75%
BreadcrumbList structured data not detected63.60%
AggregateRating structured data not detected91.06%
Service or treatment structured data not detected91.90%
Privacy-policy link not detected42.09%
Explore the Fort Smith market
Common questions
Dental SEO and website questions for Fort Smith
- How good are dental practice websites in Fort Smith?
- Across 40 audited Fort Smith dental practice websites, the median DentalPresence Score is 77 out of 100, and the best 25% of local sites score 84.25 or higher. The score summarizes 37 deterministic website and SEO checks covering structured data, website fundamentals, and the patient journey.
- What do Fort Smith dental websites most often get wrong?
- The most common gaps detected on audited Fort Smith dental websites are: “FAQPage structured data not detected” (93% of evaluated sites); “AggregateRating structured data not detected” (93% of evaluated sites); “Service or treatment structured data not detected” (85% of evaluated sites). “Not detected” is a bounded-crawl observation, not proof a signal is absent everywhere on a site.
- How does dental website quality in Fort Smith compare with the rest of Arkansas?
- Fort Smith's median score of 77 is 4 points above the Arkansas-wide median of 73, based on 609 audited websites across Arkansas.
- How can I check my own dental practice website's SEO?
- Run a free DentalPresence score: it audits a practice website against the same 37 checks behind every figure on this page and returns a prioritized list of what to fix first. No card is required.
Methodology and limitations
How these live figures are computed
Live cohort. Figures cover the indexable audited practice websites currently published for Fort Smith in the DentalPresence index and recompute as sites are re-audited, so they will drift from the frozen 2026 study numbers over time. Each check's percentage uses only the websites where that check was actually evaluated, shown as its base.
Scoring. Methodology dps-37-v1: a bounded HTTP crawl of robots.txt, sitemap signals, the homepage, and up to two linked internal pages, scored across 37 deterministic checks. “Not detected” is a limited observation, not proof of absence.
What is excluded. Crawl-accessibility findings (DNS failures, blocked crawls, timeouts) come from the frozen study run and use a different cohort base, so they are not restated here — see the Arkansas benchmark for them. Percentages are withheld wherever fewer than 30 websites form the base.
No clinical claims. Website signals only — not a clinical rating. These figures do not use rankings, traffic, conversions, credentials, or patient outcomes, and a failed check is not proof of lost revenue or poor care.
Use the benchmark
Score a dental website against the same framework
The Fort Smith figures describe a market, not an individual practice. Run a free score to inspect the public website signals detected for one practice — the same 37-check framework behind every number on this page.