Dental SEO & Website Benchmarks: Draper, UT
Live figures from 33 indexable audited Draper dental practice websites, recomputed as practices are re-audited. Most recent audit August 30, 2026. Methodology dps-37-v1.
71
median score
−4.00 vs Utah median 75
69.30
average score
Utah average: 71.58
78
top quartile
the score the best 25% of local websites clear
33
websites audited
of 1,267 across Utah
Score distribution
Grade distribution in Draper
Counts use all 33 indexable audited Draper websites.
A
0.00%
0 of 33
B
21.21%
7 of 33
C
39.39%
13 of 33
D
21.21%
7 of 33
F
18.18%
6 of 33
Utah distribution: A 4% · B 32% · C 27% · D 17% · F 19% (1,267 websites).
Largest local difference first
Where Draper 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 Draper websites are omitted.
97%
FAQPage structured data not detected
32 of 33 evaluated Draper websites — vs 95.34% across Utah.
94%
Service or treatment structured data not detected
31 of 33 evaluated Draper websites — vs 94.87% across Utah.
91%
AggregateRating structured data not detected
30 of 33 evaluated Draper websites — vs 89.50% across Utah.
| Check | Draper rate | Utah rate | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Unclear H1 structureWebsite fundamentals | 69.70%23 of 33 evaluated | 56.35%714 of 1,267 evaluated | +13.35 pp |
| XML sitemap not detectedWebsite fundamentals | 39.39%13 of 33 evaluated | 28.41%360 of 1,267 evaluated | +10.98 pp |
| Dentist or LocalBusiness structured data not detectedStructured data | 51.52%17 of 33 evaluated | 43.41%550 of 1,267 evaluated | +8.11 pp |
| Clear booking action not detectedPatient journey | 60.61%20 of 33 evaluated | 52.88%670 of 1,267 evaluated | +7.73 pp |
| Insurance or payment page not detectedPatient journey | 48.48%16 of 33 evaluated | 55.09%698 of 1,267 evaluated | −6.61 pp |
| Missing meta descriptionsWebsite fundamentals | 33.33%11 of 33 evaluated | 39.78%504 of 1,267 evaluated | −6.45 pp |
| Privacy-policy link not detectedPatient journey | 54.55%18 of 33 evaluated | 49.49%627 of 1,267 evaluated | +5.06 pp |
| Missing canonical tagsWebsite fundamentals | 39.39%13 of 33 evaluated | 34.49%437 of 1,267 evaluated | +4.90 pp |
| BreadcrumbList structured data not detectedStructured data | 63.64%21 of 33 evaluated | 68.35%866 of 1,267 evaluated | −4.71 pp |
| FAQ page not detectedPatient journey | 72.73%24 of 33 evaluated | 69.14%876 of 1,267 evaluated | +3.59 pp |
| Emergency-services page not detectedPatient journey | 66.67%22 of 33 evaluated | 63.30%802 of 1,267 evaluated | +3.37 pp |
| Limited useful contentWebsite fundamentals | 33.33%11 of 33 evaluated | 36.46%462 of 1,267 evaluated | −3.13 pp |
| Contact or inquiry form not detectedPatient journey | 72.73%24 of 33 evaluated | 70.96%899 of 1,267 evaluated | +1.77 pp |
| FAQPage structured data not detectedStructured data | 96.97%32 of 33 evaluated | 95.34%1,208 of 1,267 evaluated | +1.63 pp |
| Images missing alternative textWebsite fundamentals | 72.73%24 of 33 evaluated | 71.19%902 of 1,267 evaluated | +1.54 pp |
| AggregateRating structured data not detectedStructured data | 90.91%30 of 33 evaluated | 89.50%1,134 of 1,267 evaluated | +1.41 pp |
| Service or treatment structured data not detectedStructured data | 93.94%31 of 33 evaluated | 94.87%1,202 of 1,267 evaluated | −0.93 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 Draper market
Common questions
Dental SEO and website questions for Draper
- How good are dental practice websites in Draper?
- Across 33 audited Draper dental practice websites, the median DentalPresence Score is 71 out of 100, and the best 25% of local sites score 78 or higher. The score summarizes 37 deterministic website and SEO checks covering structured data, website fundamentals, and the patient journey.
- What do Draper dental websites most often get wrong?
- The most common gaps detected on audited Draper dental websites are: “FAQPage structured data not detected” (97% of evaluated sites); “Service or treatment structured data not detected” (94% of evaluated sites); “AggregateRating structured data not detected” (91% 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 Draper compare with the rest of Utah?
- Draper's median score of 71 is 4 points below the Utah-wide median of 75, based on 1,267 audited websites across Utah.
- 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 Draper 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 Utah 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 Draper 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.