Dental Website SEO Benchmark: Iowa (2026)
Based on 380 audited dental websites in Iowa, from 556 attempted domains. Cohort dps-37-v1.
Browse the Iowa practice directoryIowa practices scored a median of 74, 3 points below the national median of 77. The largest difference versus the national cohort (n=50,405) was dentist or LocalBusiness structured data not detected: 49.47% of 380 Iowa sites, 10.75 percentage points higher than the national rate. Iowa's strongest other relative result was missing canonical tags, with the observed gap 0.88 percentage points below the national rate.
74
Median score
−3.00 vs national median 77
72.38
Mean score
−1.75 vs national mean 74.13
380
Websites checked
Nationwide: 50,405 websites checked
68.35%
Auditable rate
−2.32 pp vs national 70.67% (50,405 of 71,323); state base 380 of 556
Score distribution
Grade distribution
Percentages use all 380 audited Iowa domains as the base.
A
3.68%
14 of 380
B
26.58%
101 of 380
C
35.79%
136 of 380
D
21.05%
80 of 380
F
12.89%
49 of 380
Category detail
Average category scores
Each average uses the same 380-domain audited base. Local SEO is shown only as a labelled detail because three inputs were not evaluated in this cohort.
60.09
Website fundamentals
Average across 380 websites
65.09
AI visibility
Average across 380 websites
66.03
Patient trust
Average across 380 websites
98.06
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 | Iowa rate | National rate | Difference vs national |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dentist or LocalBusiness structured data not detectedStructured data | 49.47%188 of 380 | 38.72%50,405 websites | +10.75 pp |
| Emergency-services page not detectedPatient journey | 68.42%260 of 380 | 58.40%50,405 websites | +10.02 pp |
| Clear booking action not detectedPatient journey | 49.74%189 of 380 | 42.35%50,405 websites | +7.39 pp |
| Privacy-policy link not detectedPatient journey | 48.42%184 of 380 | 42.09%50,405 websites | +6.33 pp |
| Unclear H1 structureWebsite fundamentals | 58.95%224 of 380 | 53.80%50,405 websites | +5.15 pp |
| AggregateRating structured data not detectedStructured data | 96.05%365 of 380 | 91.06%50,405 websites | +4.99 pp |
| Missing meta descriptionsWebsite fundamentals | 37.37%142 of 380 | 33.36%50,405 websites | +4.01 pp |
| Contact or inquiry form not detectedPatient journey | 72.37%275 of 380 | 68.70%50,405 websites | +3.67 pp |
| HTTP 403 responseCrawl accessibility | 11.51%64 of 556 | 8.09%71,323 websites | +3.42 pp |
| Limited useful contentWebsite fundamentals | 35.53%135 of 380 | 32.11%50,405 websites | +3.42 pp |
| Images missing alternative textWebsite fundamentals | 76.84%292 of 380 | 74.25%50,405 websites | +2.59 pp |
| BreadcrumbList structured data not detectedStructured data | 66.05%251 of 380 | 63.60%50,405 websites | +2.45 pp |
| FAQ page not detectedPatient journey | 67.89%258 of 380 | 65.47%50,405 websites | +2.42 pp |
| DNS failureCrawl accessibility | 8.45%47 of 556 | 10.68%71,323 websites | −2.23 pp |
| FAQPage structured data not detectedStructured data | 97.63%371 of 380 | 95.57%50,405 websites | +2.06 pp |
| Service or treatment structured data not detectedStructured data | 93.68%356 of 380 | 91.90%50,405 websites | +1.78 pp |
| Other crawl failureCrawl accessibility | 5.76%32 of 556 | 4.22%71,323 websites | +1.54 pp |
| XML sitemap not detectedWebsite fundamentals | 26.05%99 of 380 | 24.75%50,405 websites | +1.30 pp |
| Missing canonical tagsWebsite fundamentals | 25.26%96 of 380 | 26.14%50,405 websites | −0.88 pp |
| Insurance or payment page not detectedPatient journey | 52.11%198 of 380 | 51.40%50,405 websites | +0.71 pp |
| robots.txt restrictionCrawl accessibility | 3.24%18 of 556 | 3.82%71,323 websites | −0.58 pp |
| Other HTTP errorCrawl accessibility | 1.98%11 of 556 | 1.73%71,323 websites | +0.25 pp |
| TimeoutCrawl accessibility | 0.36%2 of 556 | 0.40%71,323 websites | −0.04 pp |
| Invalid responseCrawl accessibility | 0.36%2 of 556 | 0.38%71,323 websites | −0.02 pp |
Largest audited city-state samples
Top Iowa 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Des Moines, IA | 21 | 70 |
| West Des Moines, IA | 20 | 80 |
| Cedar Rapids, IA | 19 | 80 |
| Davenport, IA | 18 | 67 |
| Ankeny, IA | 13 | 76 |
| Dubuque, IA | 13 | 74 |
| Iowa City, IA | 11 | 68 |
| Sioux City, IA | 10 | 83 |
| Ames, IA | 9 | 75 |
| Cedar Falls, IA | 9 | 72 |
Common questions
Dental SEO and website questions for Iowa
- How do Iowa dental practice websites score?
- Across 380 audited Iowa dental websites, the median DentalPresence Score is 74 out of 100 — 3 points below the national median of 77. The score summarizes 37 deterministic website and SEO checks.
- What do Iowa dental websites most often get wrong?
- The most widespread gaps observed in the Iowa cohort are: “FAQPage structured data not detected” (98% of audited sites); “AggregateRating structured data not detected” (96% of audited sites); “Service or treatment structured data not detected” (94% 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 Iowa 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 covered 109,408 matched practice-location candidates across 71,323 normalized domains. Website-level findings use one deterministic representative candidate for each of the 50,405 successfully crawled domains, avoiding duplicate-domain weighting.
Collection window. Public pages were crawled on 2–3 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 U.S. dental office. 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.