Dental SEO & Website Benchmarks: Culver City, CA
Live figures from 44 indexable audited Culver City dental practice websites, recomputed as practices are re-audited. Most recent audit September 21, 2026. Methodology dps-37-v1.
70.50
median score
−2.50 vs California median 73
68.32
average score
California average: 69.62
80
top quartile
the score the best 25% of local websites clear
44
websites audited
of 14,085 across California
Score distribution
Grade distribution in Culver City
Counts use all 44 indexable audited Culver City websites.
A
4.55%
2 of 44
B
29.55%
13 of 44
C
22.73%
10 of 44
D
11.36%
5 of 44
F
31.82%
14 of 44
California distribution: A 4% · B 28% · C 27% · D 16% · F 25% (14,085 websites).
Largest local difference first
Where Culver City 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 Culver City websites are omitted.
95%
Service or treatment structured data not detected
42 of 44 evaluated Culver City websites — vs 94.83% across California.
93%
FAQPage structured data not detected
41 of 44 evaluated Culver City websites — vs 95.48% across California.
93%
AggregateRating structured data not detected
41 of 44 evaluated Culver City websites — vs 91.37% across California.
| Check | Culver City rate | California rate | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Images missing alternative textWebsite fundamentals | 56.82%25 of 44 evaluated | 65.96%9,291 of 14,085 evaluated | −9.14 pp |
| Privacy-policy link not detectedPatient journey | 61.36%27 of 44 evaluated | 52.37%7,376 of 14,085 evaluated | +8.99 pp |
| BreadcrumbList structured data not detectedStructured data | 81.82%36 of 44 evaluated | 73.25%10,317 of 14,085 evaluated | +8.57 pp |
| XML sitemap not detectedWebsite fundamentals | 43.18%19 of 44 evaluated | 35.84%5,048 of 14,085 evaluated | +7.34 pp |
| Limited useful contentWebsite fundamentals | 47.73%21 of 44 evaluated | 41.15%5,796 of 14,085 evaluated | +6.58 pp |
| Missing canonical tagsWebsite fundamentals | 45.45%20 of 44 evaluated | 40.58%5,716 of 14,085 evaluated | +4.87 pp |
| Contact or inquiry form not detectedPatient journey | 65.91%29 of 44 evaluated | 70.00%9,859 of 14,085 evaluated | −4.09 pp |
| Unclear H1 structureWebsite fundamentals | 61.36%27 of 44 evaluated | 58.81%8,283 of 14,085 evaluated | +2.55 pp |
| Insurance or payment page not detectedPatient journey | 65.91%29 of 44 evaluated | 63.39%8,928 of 14,085 evaluated | +2.52 pp |
| FAQPage structured data not detectedStructured data | 93.18%41 of 44 evaluated | 95.48%13,449 of 14,085 evaluated | −2.30 pp |
| FAQ page not detectedPatient journey | 72.73%32 of 44 evaluated | 70.44%9,921 of 14,085 evaluated | +2.29 pp |
| Missing meta descriptionsWebsite fundamentals | 45.45%20 of 44 evaluated | 43.23%6,089 of 14,085 evaluated | +2.22 pp |
| AggregateRating structured data not detectedStructured data | 93.18%41 of 44 evaluated | 91.37%12,870 of 14,085 evaluated | +1.81 pp |
| Emergency-services page not detectedPatient journey | 65.91%29 of 44 evaluated | 67.40%9,493 of 14,085 evaluated | −1.49 pp |
| Clear booking action not detectedPatient journey | 52.27%23 of 44 evaluated | 51.49%7,252 of 14,085 evaluated | +0.78 pp |
| Service or treatment structured data not detectedStructured data | 95.45%42 of 44 evaluated | 94.83%13,357 of 14,085 evaluated | +0.62 pp |
| Dentist or LocalBusiness structured data not detectedStructured data | 50.00%22 of 44 evaluated | 50.25%7,078 of 14,085 evaluated | −0.25 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 Culver City market
Common questions
Dental SEO and website questions for Culver City
- How good are dental practice websites in Culver City?
- Across 44 audited Culver City dental practice websites, the median DentalPresence Score is 70.50 out of 100, and the best 25% of local sites score 80 or higher. The score summarizes 37 deterministic website and SEO checks covering structured data, website fundamentals, and the patient journey.
- What do Culver City dental websites most often get wrong?
- The most common gaps detected on audited Culver City dental websites are: “Service or treatment structured data not detected” (95% of evaluated sites); “FAQPage structured data not detected” (93% of evaluated sites); “AggregateRating structured data not detected” (93% 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 Culver City compare with the rest of California?
- Culver City's median score of 70.50 is 2.5 points below the California-wide median of 73, based on 14,085 audited websites across California.
- 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 Culver City 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 California 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 Culver City 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.