Dental SEO & Website Benchmarks: San Francisco, CA
Live figures from 377 indexable audited San Francisco dental practice websites, recomputed as practices are re-audited. Most recent audit September 20, 2026. Methodology dps-37-v1.
71
median score
−2.00 vs California median 73
68.31
average score
California average: 69.61
81
top quartile
the score the best 25% of local websites clear
377
websites audited
of 14,083 across California
Score distribution
Grade distribution in San Francisco
Counts use all 377 indexable audited San Francisco websites.
A
0.53%
2 of 377
B
28.38%
107 of 377
C
27.32%
103 of 377
D
15.65%
59 of 377
F
28.12%
106 of 377
California distribution: A 4% · B 28% · C 27% · D 16% · F 25% (14,083 websites).
Largest local difference first
Where San Francisco 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 San Francisco websites are omitted.
97%
FAQPage structured data not detected
364 of 377 evaluated San Francisco websites — vs 95.48% across California.
94%
Service or treatment structured data not detected
353 of 377 evaluated San Francisco websites — vs 94.84% across California.
90%
AggregateRating structured data not detected
340 of 377 evaluated San Francisco websites — vs 91.37% across California.
| Check | San Francisco rate | California rate | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Emergency-services page not detectedPatient journey | 76.13%287 of 377 evaluated | 67.39%9,491 of 14,083 evaluated | +8.74 pp |
| BreadcrumbList structured data not detectedStructured data | 80.11%302 of 377 evaluated | 73.26%10,317 of 14,083 evaluated | +6.85 pp |
| Missing meta descriptionsWebsite fundamentals | 48.81%184 of 377 evaluated | 43.24%6,089 of 14,083 evaluated | +5.57 pp |
| Clear booking action not detectedPatient journey | 55.17%208 of 377 evaluated | 51.49%7,252 of 14,083 evaluated | +3.68 pp |
| Insurance or payment page not detectedPatient journey | 66.58%251 of 377 evaluated | 63.40%8,929 of 14,083 evaluated | +3.18 pp |
| Privacy-policy link not detectedPatient journey | 55.17%208 of 377 evaluated | 52.37%7,375 of 14,083 evaluated | +2.80 pp |
| Dentist or LocalBusiness structured data not detectedStructured data | 53.05%200 of 377 evaluated | 50.26%7,078 of 14,083 evaluated | +2.79 pp |
| Images missing alternative textWebsite fundamentals | 68.44%258 of 377 evaluated | 65.94%9,286 of 14,083 evaluated | +2.50 pp |
| FAQ page not detectedPatient journey | 72.94%275 of 377 evaluated | 70.45%9,922 of 14,083 evaluated | +2.49 pp |
| Limited useful contentWebsite fundamentals | 43.50%164 of 377 evaluated | 41.15%5,795 of 14,083 evaluated | +2.35 pp |
| Missing canonical tagsWebsite fundamentals | 42.18%159 of 377 evaluated | 40.57%5,714 of 14,083 evaluated | +1.61 pp |
| Service or treatment structured data not detectedStructured data | 93.63%353 of 377 evaluated | 94.84%13,356 of 14,083 evaluated | −1.21 pp |
| AggregateRating structured data not detectedStructured data | 90.19%340 of 377 evaluated | 91.37%12,868 of 14,083 evaluated | −1.18 pp |
| FAQPage structured data not detectedStructured data | 96.55%364 of 377 evaluated | 95.48%13,447 of 14,083 evaluated | +1.07 pp |
| Unclear H1 structureWebsite fundamentals | 58.62%221 of 377 evaluated | 58.82%8,284 of 14,083 evaluated | −0.20 pp |
| XML sitemap not detectedWebsite fundamentals | 35.81%135 of 377 evaluated | 35.84%5,047 of 14,083 evaluated | −0.03 pp |
| Contact or inquiry form not detectedPatient journey | 70.03%264 of 377 evaluated | 70.00%9,858 of 14,083 evaluated | +0.03 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 San Francisco market
Common questions
Dental SEO and website questions for San Francisco
- How good are dental practice websites in San Francisco?
- Across 377 audited San Francisco dental practice websites, the median DentalPresence Score is 71 out of 100, and the best 25% of local sites score 81 or higher. The score summarizes 37 deterministic website and SEO checks covering structured data, website fundamentals, and the patient journey.
- What do San Francisco dental websites most often get wrong?
- The most common gaps detected on audited San Francisco dental websites are: “FAQPage structured data not detected” (97% of evaluated sites); “Service or treatment structured data not detected” (94% of evaluated sites); “AggregateRating structured data not detected” (90% 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 San Francisco compare with the rest of California?
- San Francisco's median score of 71 is 2 points below the California-wide median of 73, based on 14,083 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 San Francisco 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 San Francisco 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.