Dental SEO & Website Benchmarks: Redmond, WA
Live figures from 64 indexable audited Redmond dental practice websites, recomputed as practices are re-audited. Most recent audit September 19, 2026. Methodology dps-37-v1.
81
median score
+6.00 vs Washington median 75
73.83
average score
Washington average: 71.43
85
top quartile
the score the best 25% of local websites clear
64
websites audited
of 2,892 across Washington
Score distribution
Grade distribution in Redmond
Counts use all 64 indexable audited Redmond websites.
A
3.13%
2 of 64
B
54.69%
35 of 64
C
14.06%
9 of 64
D
7.81%
5 of 64
F
20.31%
13 of 64
Washington distribution: A 4% · B 33% · C 27% · D 17% · F 20% (2,892 websites).
Largest local difference first
Where Redmond 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 Redmond websites are omitted.
97%
FAQPage structured data not detected
62 of 64 evaluated Redmond websites — vs 96.23% across Washington.
92%
Service or treatment structured data not detected
59 of 64 evaluated Redmond websites — vs 93.91% across Washington.
92%
AggregateRating structured data not detected
59 of 64 evaluated Redmond websites — vs 91.53% across Washington.
| Check | Redmond rate | Washington rate | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Privacy-policy link not detectedPatient journey | 34.38%22 of 64 evaluated | 49.93%1,444 of 2,892 evaluated | −15.55 pp |
| Clear booking action not detectedPatient journey | 32.81%21 of 64 evaluated | 48.31%1,397 of 2,892 evaluated | −15.50 pp |
| Limited useful contentWebsite fundamentals | 25.00%16 of 64 evaluated | 38.62%1,117 of 2,892 evaluated | −13.62 pp |
| Dentist or LocalBusiness structured data not detectedStructured data | 34.38%22 of 64 evaluated | 45.64%1,320 of 2,892 evaluated | −11.26 pp |
| Missing canonical tagsWebsite fundamentals | 25.00%16 of 64 evaluated | 33.71%975 of 2,892 evaluated | −8.71 pp |
| Insurance or payment page not detectedPatient journey | 46.88%30 of 64 evaluated | 55.05%1,592 of 2,892 evaluated | −8.17 pp |
| XML sitemap not detectedWebsite fundamentals | 39.06%25 of 64 evaluated | 33.09%957 of 2,892 evaluated | +5.97 pp |
| BreadcrumbList structured data not detectedStructured data | 65.63%42 of 64 evaluated | 69.71%2,016 of 2,892 evaluated | −4.08 pp |
| Missing meta descriptionsWebsite fundamentals | 43.75%28 of 64 evaluated | 40.32%1,166 of 2,892 evaluated | +3.43 pp |
| Images missing alternative textWebsite fundamentals | 70.31%45 of 64 evaluated | 67.46%1,951 of 2,892 evaluated | +2.85 pp |
| Contact or inquiry form not detectedPatient journey | 76.56%49 of 64 evaluated | 73.76%2,133 of 2,892 evaluated | +2.80 pp |
| Emergency-services page not detectedPatient journey | 60.94%39 of 64 evaluated | 63.07%1,824 of 2,892 evaluated | −2.13 pp |
| Service or treatment structured data not detectedStructured data | 92.19%59 of 64 evaluated | 93.91%2,716 of 2,892 evaluated | −1.72 pp |
| FAQ page not detectedPatient journey | 67.19%43 of 64 evaluated | 68.50%1,981 of 2,892 evaluated | −1.31 pp |
| Unclear H1 structureWebsite fundamentals | 59.38%38 of 64 evaluated | 58.16%1,682 of 2,892 evaluated | +1.22 pp |
| AggregateRating structured data not detectedStructured data | 92.19%59 of 64 evaluated | 91.53%2,647 of 2,892 evaluated | +0.66 pp |
| FAQPage structured data not detectedStructured data | 96.88%62 of 64 evaluated | 96.23%2,783 of 2,892 evaluated | +0.65 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 Redmond market
Common questions
Dental SEO and website questions for Redmond
- How good are dental practice websites in Redmond?
- Across 64 audited Redmond dental practice websites, the median DentalPresence Score is 81 out of 100, and the best 25% of local sites score 85 or higher. The score summarizes 37 deterministic website and SEO checks covering structured data, website fundamentals, and the patient journey.
- What do Redmond dental websites most often get wrong?
- The most common gaps detected on audited Redmond dental websites are: “FAQPage structured data not detected” (97% of evaluated sites); “Service or treatment structured data not detected” (92% of evaluated sites); “AggregateRating structured data not detected” (92% 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 Redmond compare with the rest of Washington?
- Redmond's median score of 81 is 6 points above the Washington-wide median of 75, based on 2,892 audited websites across Washington.
- 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 Redmond 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 Washington 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 Redmond 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.