Dental Website SEO Benchmark: Australian Capital Territory (2026)
Based on 113 audited dental websites in Australian Capital Territory, from 143 attempted domains. Cohort dps-37-v1.
Browse the Australian Capital Territory practice directoryAustralian Capital Territory practices scored a median of 74, 1 point above the national median of 73. The largest difference versus the national cohort (n=6,313) was emergency-services page not detected: 57.52% of 113 Australian Capital Territory sites, 5.16 percentage points lower than the national rate. Australian Capital Territory's strongest other relative result was breadcrumbList structured data not detected, with the observed gap 5.01 percentage points below the national rate.
74
Median score
+1.00 vs national median 73
71.43
Mean score
+1.38 vs national mean 70.05
113
Websites checked
Nationwide: 6,313 websites checked
79.02%
Auditable rate
+3.55 pp vs national 75.47% (6,313 of 8,365); state base 113 of 143
Score distribution
Grade distribution
Percentages use all 113 audited Australian Capital Territory domains as the base.
A
2.65%
3 of 113
B
30.97%
35 of 113
C
30.97%
35 of 113
D
16.81%
19 of 113
F
18.58%
21 of 113
Category detail
Average category scores
Each average uses the same 113-domain audited base. Local SEO is shown only as a labelled detail because three inputs were not evaluated in this cohort.
60.65
Website fundamentals
Average across 113 websites
66.92
AI visibility
Average across 113 websites
63.82
Patient trust
Average across 113 websites
93.95
Local SEO
Partial; upward-biased
Largest absolute difference first
Metric rates versus the national cohort
“Not detected” means a signal was absent from the homepage and up to two linked pages in this bounded crawl; it does not prove the signal is absent everywhere on the site. Every percentage below shows its observation base.
| Metric | Australian Capital Territory rate | National rate | Difference vs national |
|---|---|---|---|
| Emergency-services page not detectedPatient journey | 57.52%65 of 113 | 62.68%6,305 websites | −5.16 pp |
| BreadcrumbList structured data not detectedStructured data | 59.29%67 of 113 | 64.30%6,305 websites | −5.01 pp |
| Insurance or payment page not detectedPatient journey | 73.45%83 of 113 | 68.96%6,305 websites | +4.49 pp |
| AggregateRating structured data not detectedStructured data | 97.35%110 of 113 | 93.72%6,305 websites | +3.63 pp |
| Missing meta descriptionsWebsite fundamentals | 50.44%57 of 113 | 47.15%6,305 websites | +3.29 pp |
| Clear booking action not detectedPatient journey | 42.48%48 of 113 | 45.73%6,305 websites | −3.25 pp |
| Privacy-policy link not detectedPatient journey | 56.64%64 of 113 | 59.84%6,305 websites | −3.20 pp |
| Dentist or LocalBusiness structured data not detectedStructured data | 44.25%50 of 113 | 47.20%6,305 websites | −2.95 pp |
| Other HTTP errorCrawl accessibility | 0.00%0 of 143 | 2.31%8,346 websites | −2.31 pp |
| Images missing alternative textWebsite fundamentals | 70.80%80 of 113 | 72.86%6,305 websites | −2.06 pp |
| Missing canonical tagsWebsite fundamentals | 29.20%33 of 113 | 31.10%6,305 websites | −1.90 pp |
| HTTP 403 responseCrawl accessibility | 2.10%3 of 143 | 3.85%8,346 websites | −1.75 pp |
| FAQPage structured data not detectedStructured data | 92.92%105 of 113 | 91.25%6,305 websites | +1.67 pp |
| Other crawl failureCrawl accessibility | 5.59%8 of 143 | 3.97%8,346 websites | +1.62 pp |
| Unclear H1 structureWebsite fundamentals | 61.95%70 of 113 | 60.84%6,305 websites | +1.11 pp |
| DNS failureCrawl accessibility | 12.59%18 of 143 | 13.60%8,346 websites | −1.01 pp |
| FAQ page not detectedPatient journey | 71.68%81 of 113 | 72.64%6,305 websites | −0.96 pp |
| XML sitemap not detectedWebsite fundamentals | 30.97%35 of 113 | 31.59%6,305 websites | −0.62 pp |
| TimeoutCrawl accessibility | 0.70%1 of 143 | 0.14%8,346 websites | +0.56 pp |
| robots.txt restrictionCrawl accessibility | 0.00%0 of 143 | 0.48%8,346 websites | −0.48 pp |
| Service or treatment structured data not detectedStructured data | 92.92%105 of 113 | 93.39%6,305 websites | −0.47 pp |
| Limited useful contentWebsite fundamentals | 38.94%44 of 113 | 39.35%6,305 websites | −0.41 pp |
| Contact or inquiry form not detectedPatient journey | 65.49%74 of 113 | 65.15%6,305 websites | +0.34 pp |
| Invalid responseCrawl accessibility | 0.00%0 of 143 | 0.11%8,346 websites | −0.11 pp |
Largest audited city-state samples
Top Australian Capital Territory markets in the cohort
Markets are ordered by audited-domain count. Each row gives its own base; these are descriptive cohort cuts, not city rankings.
| Market | Audited domains | Median score |
|---|---|---|
| Canberra, ACT | 47 | 74 |
| Belconnen, ACT | 14 | 74.50 |
| Woden Valley, ACT | 12 | 76 |
| Gungahlin, ACT | 10 | 76.50 |
| Tuggeranong, ACT | 8 | 64 |
| Molonglo Valley, ACT | 3 | 86 |
| Weston Creek, ACT | 3 | 75 |
| Deakin, ACT | 2 | 65.50 |
| Greenway, ACT | 2 | 62.50 |
| Canberra City, ACT | 1 | 88 |
Common questions
Dental SEO and website questions for Australian Capital Territory
- How do Australian Capital Territory dental practice websites score?
- Across 113 audited Australian Capital Territory dental websites, the median DentalPresence Score is 74 out of 100 — 1 point above the national median of 73. The score summarizes 37 deterministic website and SEO checks.
- What do Australian Capital Territory dental websites most often get wrong?
- The most widespread gaps observed in the Australian Capital Territory cohort are: “AggregateRating structured data not detected” (97% of audited sites); “FAQPage structured data not detected” (93% of audited sites); “Service or treatment structured data not detected” (93% of audited sites). “Not detected” is a bounded-crawl observation, not proof a signal is absent everywhere on a site.
- How can I compare my dental practice website with the Australian Capital Territory average?
- 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
What this study measures—and what it does not
Cohort. The completed production run attempted 8,365 normalized Australia practice domains and successfully audited 6,313 of them. Website-level findings use one deterministic representative candidate per domain, avoiding duplicate-domain weighting.
Collection window. Public pages were crawled on 23–24 August 2026 using methodology dps-37-v1. The bounded HTTP crawler inspected robots.txt, sitemap signals, the homepage, and up to two linked internal pages. Browser rendering was not used for this index run.
Scoring. The DentalPresence Score averages four deterministic category scores. Three Local SEO inputs—Google Business Profile, cross-directory NAP consistency, and service coverage—were not evaluated in this open-data backfill, so the Local SEO average is partial and upward-biased.
Detection limits. A signal not detected in three pages may exist elsewhere, be injected only after JavaScript rendering, or use markup the parser did not recognize. The high “orphan page” result was excluded from headline recommendations because a bounded crawl cannot establish sitewide orphan status reliably.
Sampling. This is a large matched open-place cohort, not a probability sample of every Australia dental practice. It should not be used to estimate national market share or infer the quality of any individual practice.
No causal claims. The study did not use rankings, traffic, conversions, clinical data, credentials, safety records, or patient outcomes. A failed check is an observable website signal, not proof of lost revenue or poor care.
Use the benchmark
Score a dental website against the same framework
The state benchmark describes a cohort, not an individual practice. Run a free score to inspect the public website signals detected for one practice.