Dental SEO & Website Benchmarks: Spring, TX
Live figures from 122 indexable audited Spring dental practice websites, recomputed as practices are re-audited. Most recent audit September 19, 2026. Methodology dps-37-v1.
79
median score
+3.00 vs Texas median 76
73.94
average score
Texas average: 72.29
86
top quartile
the score the best 25% of local websites clear
122
websites audited
of 8,703 across Texas
Score distribution
Grade distribution in Spring
Counts use all 122 indexable audited Spring websites.
A
5.74%
7 of 122
B
43.44%
53 of 122
C
22.95%
28 of 122
D
11.48%
14 of 122
F
16.39%
20 of 122
Texas distribution: A 5% · B 36% · C 27% · D 12% · F 20% (8,703 websites).
Largest local difference first
Where Spring 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 Spring websites are omitted.
93%
FAQPage structured data not detected
113 of 122 evaluated Spring websites — vs 95.30% across Texas.
91%
AggregateRating structured data not detected
111 of 122 evaluated Spring websites — vs 91.58% across Texas.
89%
Service or treatment structured data not detected
109 of 122 evaluated Spring websites — vs 91.83% across Texas.
| Check | Spring rate | Texas rate | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Emergency-services page not detectedPatient journey | 49.18%60 of 122 evaluated | 60.03%5,224 of 8,703 evaluated | −10.85 pp |
| Dentist or LocalBusiness structured data not detectedStructured data | 32.79%40 of 122 evaluated | 43.10%3,751 of 8,703 evaluated | −10.31 pp |
| FAQ page not detectedPatient journey | 57.38%70 of 122 evaluated | 67.43%5,868 of 8,703 evaluated | −10.05 pp |
| Privacy-policy link not detectedPatient journey | 36.89%45 of 122 evaluated | 45.87%3,992 of 8,703 evaluated | −8.98 pp |
| Images missing alternative textWebsite fundamentals | 58.20%71 of 122 evaluated | 66.32%5,772 of 8,703 evaluated | −8.12 pp |
| Contact or inquiry form not detectedPatient journey | 77.05%94 of 122 evaluated | 69.65%6,062 of 8,703 evaluated | +7.40 pp |
| Missing meta descriptionsWebsite fundamentals | 32.79%40 of 122 evaluated | 38.66%3,365 of 8,703 evaluated | −5.87 pp |
| Clear booking action not detectedPatient journey | 41.80%51 of 122 evaluated | 45.43%3,954 of 8,703 evaluated | −3.63 pp |
| XML sitemap not detectedWebsite fundamentals | 35.25%43 of 122 evaluated | 31.79%2,767 of 8,703 evaluated | +3.46 pp |
| FAQPage structured data not detectedStructured data | 92.62%113 of 122 evaluated | 95.30%8,294 of 8,703 evaluated | −2.68 pp |
| Service or treatment structured data not detectedStructured data | 89.34%109 of 122 evaluated | 91.83%7,992 of 8,703 evaluated | −2.49 pp |
| Unclear H1 structureWebsite fundamentals | 54.10%66 of 122 evaluated | 55.43%4,824 of 8,703 evaluated | −1.33 pp |
| Limited useful contentWebsite fundamentals | 36.07%44 of 122 evaluated | 36.94%3,215 of 8,703 evaluated | −0.87 pp |
| Insurance or payment page not detectedPatient journey | 52.46%64 of 122 evaluated | 53.15%4,626 of 8,703 evaluated | −0.69 pp |
| AggregateRating structured data not detectedStructured data | 90.98%111 of 122 evaluated | 91.58%7,970 of 8,703 evaluated | −0.60 pp |
| BreadcrumbList structured data not detectedStructured data | 66.39%81 of 122 evaluated | 66.87%5,820 of 8,703 evaluated | −0.48 pp |
| Missing canonical tagsWebsite fundamentals | 34.43%42 of 122 evaluated | 34.11%2,969 of 8,703 evaluated | +0.32 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 Spring market
Common questions
Dental SEO and website questions for Spring
- How good are dental practice websites in Spring?
- Across 122 audited Spring dental practice websites, the median DentalPresence Score is 79 out of 100, and the best 25% of local sites score 86 or higher. The score summarizes 37 deterministic website and SEO checks covering structured data, website fundamentals, and the patient journey.
- What do Spring dental websites most often get wrong?
- The most common gaps detected on audited Spring dental websites are: “FAQPage structured data not detected” (93% of evaluated sites); “AggregateRating structured data not detected” (91% of evaluated sites); “Service or treatment structured data not detected” (89% 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 Spring compare with the rest of Texas?
- Spring's median score of 79 is 3 points above the Texas-wide median of 76, based on 8,703 audited websites across Texas.
- 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 Spring 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 Texas 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 Spring 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.