Measured 31 August 2026 via the PYC Bath Architect Digital Visibility Index. Every figure is objective and reproducible from the methodology. Spotted an error? Request a correction.
These are specific, checkable faults on the site — not opinions about it.
Worth fixingNo XML sitemap foundSearch engines have to discover every page by following links. On a small site that is survivable; on a large one it is not.
Worth fixingNo structured data on the homepageNothing tells a search engine or an assistant what this business is, where it is, or what it does — in machine-readable terms.
Worth fixingVery little published contentThe homepage carries 258 words and the site links to no blog, news or insights section. There is little here for a search engine to match, or for an assistant to quote.
Designscape Architects leads the index with 80/100. The largest gaps are: AI search presence (0 vs 60); Visibility (0 vs 53); Content & trust (10 vs 53).
Recorded alongside the measurement to make it easier to judge, but carrying no weight in the Digital Visibility Score. See the methodology.
Companies House
No confident match on the registered name
Real-user speed (CrUX)
Too little traffic to appear in Chrome’s public dataset
Lighthouse (lab, mobile)
Performance 55 · accessibility 80 · best practices 74 · SEO 85 — biggest losses: Document does not have a meta description; Heading elements are not in a sequentially-descending order; Document does not have a main landmark.
Google profile detail
2 photos · unclaimed · no description · hours listed
Backlinks
69 referring domains · 78 links · rank 81
Site structure
1 pages crawled · 13 internal links per page · 23% of links use a generic anchor
LaBox Design’s lowest-scoring pillars among those we publish remediation guidance for:
Visibility (0/100) — read topical authority on why ranking breadth across a sector beats chasing single terms. Background on analysing this pillar: visibility.