Dental SEO & Website Benchmarks: Hattiesburg, MS
Live figures from 34 indexable audited Hattiesburg dental practice websites, recomputed as practices are re-audited. Most recent audit September 20, 2026. Methodology dps-37-v1.
72
median score
+1.00 vs Mississippi median 71
69.21
average score
Mississippi average: 68.88
81.75
top quartile
the score the best 25% of local websites clear
34
websites audited
of 585 across Mississippi
Score distribution
Grade distribution in Hattiesburg
Counts use all 34 indexable audited Hattiesburg websites.
A
0.00%
0 of 34
B
29.41%
10 of 34
C
32.35%
11 of 34
D
14.71%
5 of 34
F
23.53%
8 of 34
Mississippi distribution: A 2% · B 21% · C 36% · D 18% · F 22% (585 websites).
Largest local difference first
Where Hattiesburg 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 Hattiesburg websites are omitted.
97%
FAQPage structured data not detected
33 of 34 evaluated Hattiesburg websites — vs 97.44% across Mississippi.
94%
AggregateRating structured data not detected
32 of 34 evaluated Hattiesburg websites — vs 96.41% across Mississippi.
88%
Service or treatment structured data not detected
30 of 34 evaluated Hattiesburg websites — vs 95.56% across Mississippi.
| Check | Hattiesburg rate | Mississippi rate | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Contact or inquiry form not detectedPatient journey | 58.82%20 of 34 evaluated | 75.90%444 of 585 evaluated | −17.08 pp |
| Unclear H1 structureWebsite fundamentals | 70.59%24 of 34 evaluated | 58.97%345 of 585 evaluated | +11.62 pp |
| BreadcrumbList structured data not detectedStructured data | 64.71%22 of 34 evaluated | 75.73%443 of 585 evaluated | −11.02 pp |
| Service or treatment structured data not detectedStructured data | 88.24%30 of 34 evaluated | 95.56%559 of 585 evaluated | −7.32 pp |
| Images missing alternative textWebsite fundamentals | 76.47%26 of 34 evaluated | 70.09%410 of 585 evaluated | +6.38 pp |
| Privacy-policy link not detectedPatient journey | 47.06%16 of 34 evaluated | 52.31%306 of 585 evaluated | −5.25 pp |
| Limited useful contentWebsite fundamentals | 50.00%17 of 34 evaluated | 45.64%267 of 585 evaluated | +4.36 pp |
| FAQ page not detectedPatient journey | 76.47%26 of 34 evaluated | 72.99%427 of 585 evaluated | +3.48 pp |
| AggregateRating structured data not detectedStructured data | 94.12%32 of 34 evaluated | 96.41%564 of 585 evaluated | −2.29 pp |
| Clear booking action not detectedPatient journey | 58.82%20 of 34 evaluated | 56.58%331 of 585 evaluated | +2.24 pp |
| Insurance or payment page not detectedPatient journey | 70.59%24 of 34 evaluated | 69.06%404 of 585 evaluated | +1.53 pp |
| Missing canonical tagsWebsite fundamentals | 35.29%12 of 34 evaluated | 36.58%214 of 585 evaluated | −1.29 pp |
| Dentist or LocalBusiness structured data not detectedStructured data | 52.94%18 of 34 evaluated | 54.02%316 of 585 evaluated | −1.08 pp |
| XML sitemap not detectedWebsite fundamentals | 29.41%10 of 34 evaluated | 30.09%176 of 585 evaluated | −0.68 pp |
| Missing meta descriptionsWebsite fundamentals | 47.06%16 of 34 evaluated | 46.67%273 of 585 evaluated | +0.39 pp |
| FAQPage structured data not detectedStructured data | 97.06%33 of 34 evaluated | 97.44%570 of 585 evaluated | −0.38 pp |
| Emergency-services page not detectedPatient journey | 76.47%26 of 34 evaluated | 76.41%447 of 585 evaluated | +0.06 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 Hattiesburg market
Common questions
Dental SEO and website questions for Hattiesburg
- How good are dental practice websites in Hattiesburg?
- Across 34 audited Hattiesburg dental practice websites, the median DentalPresence Score is 72 out of 100, and the best 25% of local sites score 81.75 or higher. The score summarizes 37 deterministic website and SEO checks covering structured data, website fundamentals, and the patient journey.
- What do Hattiesburg dental websites most often get wrong?
- The most common gaps detected on audited Hattiesburg dental websites are: “FAQPage structured data not detected” (97% of evaluated sites); “AggregateRating structured data not detected” (94% of evaluated sites); “Service or treatment structured data not detected” (88% 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 Hattiesburg compare with the rest of Mississippi?
- Hattiesburg's median score of 72 is 1 point above the Mississippi-wide median of 71, based on 585 audited websites across Mississippi.
- 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 Hattiesburg 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 Mississippi 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 Hattiesburg 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.