Dental SEO & Website Benchmarks: Thunder Bay, ON
Live figures from 37 indexable audited Thunder Bay dental practice websites, recomputed as practices are re-audited. Most recent audit September 19, 2026. Methodology dps-37-v1.
66
median score
−5.00 vs Ontario median 71
66.27
average score
Ontario average: 68.44
72
top quartile
the score the best 25% of local websites clear
37
websites audited
of 5,448 across Ontario
Score distribution
Grade distribution in Thunder Bay
Counts use all 37 indexable audited Thunder Bay websites.
A
2.70%
1 of 37
B
16.22%
6 of 37
C
10.81%
4 of 37
D
43.24%
16 of 37
F
27.03%
10 of 37
Ontario distribution: A 3% · B 25% · C 25% · D 20% · F 27% (5,448 websites).
Largest local difference first
Where Thunder Bay 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 Thunder Bay websites are omitted.
97%
AggregateRating structured data not detected
36 of 37 evaluated Thunder Bay websites — vs 94.42% across Ontario.
95%
Service or treatment structured data not detected
35 of 37 evaluated Thunder Bay websites — vs 92.73% across Ontario.
95%
FAQPage structured data not detected
35 of 37 evaluated Thunder Bay websites — vs 93.12% across Ontario.
| Check | Thunder Bay rate | Ontario rate | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Limited useful contentWebsite fundamentals | 67.57%25 of 37 evaluated | 45.28%2,467 of 5,448 evaluated | +22.29 pp |
| Missing canonical tagsWebsite fundamentals | 51.35%19 of 37 evaluated | 37.83%2,061 of 5,448 evaluated | +13.52 pp |
| Emergency-services page not detectedPatient journey | 54.05%20 of 37 evaluated | 65.23%3,554 of 5,448 evaluated | −11.18 pp |
| Privacy-policy link not detectedPatient journey | 78.38%29 of 37 evaluated | 67.24%3,663 of 5,448 evaluated | +11.14 pp |
| Dentist or LocalBusiness structured data not detectedStructured data | 62.16%23 of 37 evaluated | 51.41%2,801 of 5,448 evaluated | +10.75 pp |
| Insurance or payment page not detectedPatient journey | 89.19%33 of 37 evaluated | 78.52%4,278 of 5,448 evaluated | +10.67 pp |
| Clear booking action not detectedPatient journey | 62.16%23 of 37 evaluated | 51.71%2,817 of 5,448 evaluated | +10.45 pp |
| Missing meta descriptionsWebsite fundamentals | 56.76%21 of 37 evaluated | 47.52%2,589 of 5,448 evaluated | +9.24 pp |
| XML sitemap not detectedWebsite fundamentals | 27.03%10 of 37 evaluated | 33.90%1,847 of 5,448 evaluated | −6.87 pp |
| Contact or inquiry form not detectedPatient journey | 67.57%25 of 37 evaluated | 61.25%3,337 of 5,448 evaluated | +6.32 pp |
| AggregateRating structured data not detectedStructured data | 97.30%36 of 37 evaluated | 94.42%5,144 of 5,448 evaluated | +2.88 pp |
| BreadcrumbList structured data not detectedStructured data | 75.68%28 of 37 evaluated | 73.15%3,985 of 5,448 evaluated | +2.53 pp |
| Service or treatment structured data not detectedStructured data | 94.59%35 of 37 evaluated | 92.73%5,052 of 5,448 evaluated | +1.86 pp |
| Unclear H1 structureWebsite fundamentals | 64.86%24 of 37 evaluated | 63.14%3,440 of 5,448 evaluated | +1.72 pp |
| FAQ page not detectedPatient journey | 75.68%28 of 37 evaluated | 74.01%4,032 of 5,448 evaluated | +1.67 pp |
| FAQPage structured data not detectedStructured data | 94.59%35 of 37 evaluated | 93.12%5,073 of 5,448 evaluated | +1.47 pp |
| Images missing alternative textWebsite fundamentals | 67.57%25 of 37 evaluated | 67.20%3,661 of 5,448 evaluated | +0.37 pp |
2026 Canada study baseline
The frozen national picture for the same checks
Rates from the 11,797-website 2026 Canada 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.
Emergency-services page not detected69.35%
Clear booking action not detected56.82%
Insurance or payment page not detected78.50%
Privacy-policy link not detected67.52%
Dentist or LocalBusiness structured data not detected50.03%
AggregateRating structured data not detected94.43%
FAQ page not detected73.93%
Limited useful content43.84%
XML sitemap not detected31.14%
Missing canonical tags35.19%
Missing meta descriptions46.44%
Unclear H1 structure59.50%
Contact or inquiry form not detected62.02%
FAQPage structured data not detected93.76%
Service or treatment structured data not detected93.63%
BreadcrumbList structured data not detected71.15%
Images missing alternative text69.09%
Explore the Thunder Bay market
Common questions
Dental SEO and website questions for Thunder Bay
- How good are dental practice websites in Thunder Bay?
- Across 37 audited Thunder Bay dental practice websites, the median DentalPresence Score is 66 out of 100, and the best 25% of local sites score 72 or higher. The score summarizes 37 deterministic website and SEO checks covering structured data, website fundamentals, and the patient journey.
- What do Thunder Bay dental websites most often get wrong?
- The most common gaps detected on audited Thunder Bay dental websites are: “AggregateRating structured data not detected” (97% of evaluated sites); “Service or treatment structured data not detected” (95% of evaluated sites); “FAQPage structured data not detected” (95% 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 Thunder Bay compare with the rest of Ontario?
- Thunder Bay's median score of 66 is 5 points below the Ontario-wide median of 71, based on 5,448 audited websites across Ontario.
- 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 Thunder Bay 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 Ontario 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 Thunder Bay 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.