Dental Website SEO Benchmark: Tasmania (2026)
Based on 104 audited dental websites in Tasmania, from 136 attempted domains. Cohort dps-37-v1.
Browse the Tasmania practice directoryTasmania practices scored a median of 69, 4 points below the national median of 73. The largest difference versus the national cohort (n=6,313) was limited useful content: 58.65% of 104 Tasmania sites, 19.30 percentage points higher than the national rate. Tasmania's strongest other relative result was images missing alternative text, with the observed gap 11.32 percentage points below the national rate.
69
Median score
−4.00 vs national median 73
67.30
Mean score
−2.75 vs national mean 70.05
104
Websites checked
Nationwide: 6,313 websites checked
76.47%
Auditable rate
+1.00 pp vs national 75.47% (6,313 of 8,365); state base 104 of 136
Score distribution
Grade distribution
Percentages use all 104 audited Tasmania domains as the base.
A
2.88%
3 of 104
B
18.27%
19 of 104
C
25.96%
27 of 104
D
25.96%
27 of 104
F
26.92%
28 of 104
Category detail
Average category scores
Each average uses the same 104-domain audited base. Local SEO is shown only as a labelled detail because three inputs were not evaluated in this cohort.
53.91
Website fundamentals
Average across 104 websites
63.94
AI visibility
Average across 104 websites
56.17
Patient trust
Average across 104 websites
94.98
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 | Tasmania rate | National rate | Difference vs national |
|---|---|---|---|
| Limited useful contentWebsite fundamentals | 58.65%61 of 104 | 39.35%6,305 websites | +19.30 pp |
| FAQ page not detectedPatient journey | 85.58%89 of 104 | 72.64%6,305 websites | +12.94 pp |
| BreadcrumbList structured data not detectedStructured data | 76.92%80 of 104 | 64.30%6,305 websites | +12.62 pp |
| Images missing alternative textWebsite fundamentals | 61.54%64 of 104 | 72.86%6,305 websites | −11.32 pp |
| Contact or inquiry form not detectedPatient journey | 75.96%79 of 104 | 65.15%6,305 websites | +10.81 pp |
| Missing meta descriptionsWebsite fundamentals | 57.69%60 of 104 | 47.15%6,305 websites | +10.54 pp |
| Unclear H1 structureWebsite fundamentals | 70.19%73 of 104 | 60.84%6,305 websites | +9.35 pp |
| Missing canonical tagsWebsite fundamentals | 40.38%42 of 104 | 31.10%6,305 websites | +9.28 pp |
| Dentist or LocalBusiness structured data not detectedStructured data | 55.77%58 of 104 | 47.20%6,305 websites | +8.57 pp |
| Clear booking action not detectedPatient journey | 52.88%55 of 104 | 45.73%6,305 websites | +7.15 pp |
| Insurance or payment page not detectedPatient journey | 75.96%79 of 104 | 68.96%6,305 websites | +7.00 pp |
| Emergency-services page not detectedPatient journey | 69.23%72 of 104 | 62.68%6,305 websites | +6.55 pp |
| Privacy-policy link not detectedPatient journey | 66.35%69 of 104 | 59.84%6,305 websites | +6.51 pp |
| XML sitemap not detectedWebsite fundamentals | 35.58%37 of 104 | 31.59%6,305 websites | +3.99 pp |
| FAQPage structured data not detectedStructured data | 93.27%97 of 104 | 91.25%6,305 websites | +2.02 pp |
| Other crawl failureCrawl accessibility | 5.88%8 of 136 | 3.97%8,346 websites | +1.91 pp |
| HTTP 403 responseCrawl accessibility | 2.21%3 of 136 | 3.85%8,346 websites | −1.64 pp |
| AggregateRating structured data not detectedStructured data | 95.19%99 of 104 | 93.72%6,305 websites | +1.47 pp |
| DNS failureCrawl accessibility | 12.50%17 of 136 | 13.60%8,346 websites | −1.10 pp |
| Service or treatment structured data not detectedStructured data | 92.31%96 of 104 | 93.39%6,305 websites | −1.08 pp |
| Invalid responseCrawl accessibility | 0.74%1 of 136 | 0.11%8,346 websites | +0.63 pp |
| robots.txt restrictionCrawl accessibility | 0.00%0 of 136 | 0.48%8,346 websites | −0.48 pp |
| TimeoutCrawl accessibility | 0.00%0 of 136 | 0.14%8,346 websites | −0.14 pp |
| Other HTTP errorCrawl accessibility | 2.21%3 of 136 | 2.31%8,346 websites | −0.10 pp |
Largest audited city-state samples
Top Tasmania 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Hobart, TAS | 39 | 69 |
| Launceston, TAS | 29 | 73 |
| Devonport, TAS | 7 | 66 |
| Burnie, TAS | 3 | 68 |
| Ulverstone, TAS | 3 | 65 |
| Bellerive, TAS | 2 | 42 |
| Brighton, TAS | 2 | 65.50 |
| Kingston, TAS | 2 | 58.50 |
| South Hobart, TAS | 2 | 60.50 |
| Blackmans Bay, TAS | 1 | 77 |
Common questions
Dental SEO and website questions for Tasmania
- How do Tasmania dental practice websites score?
- Across 104 audited Tasmania dental websites, the median DentalPresence Score is 69 out of 100 — 4 points below the national median of 73. The score summarizes 37 deterministic website and SEO checks.
- What do Tasmania dental websites most often get wrong?
- The most widespread gaps observed in the Tasmania cohort are: “AggregateRating structured data not detected” (95% of audited sites); “FAQPage structured data not detected” (93% of audited sites); “Service or treatment structured data not detected” (92% 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 Tasmania 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 attempted 8,365 normalized Australia practice domains and successfully audited 6,313 of them. Website-level findings use one deterministic representative candidate per domain, avoiding duplicate-domain weighting.
Collection window. Public pages were crawled on 23–24 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 Australia dental practice. 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.