Studio Four Point Ten Architects — Bath Architect Digital Visibility Score

Digital Visibility Score: 57 / 100 · Rank 21 of 80

Digital Visibility Score57/100Rank 21 of 80 · top 25%Furthest behind-8Speed & CWV: 55 against a sector median of 63

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.

Pillar breakdown vs sector median

Each pillar scored 0–100 against the sector median for this index. The final column is this firm's distance from that median.

Pillar	Score	Median	vs median
Speed & CWV	55	63	−8
Technical	100	88	+12
Local presence	85	78.5	+6.5
Visibility	0	0	level
AI search presence	20	0	+20
Content & trust	55	37	+18

Pillar performance against the sector median. Bars right of centre are above the median, left are below.

Speed & CWV		-8
Technical		+12
Local presence		+6.5
Visibility		0
AI search presence		+20
Content & trust		+18

Where this firm ranks

Ranks for 0 of 12 keywords, in the local 3-pack for 0 keywords.

Keyword	Position
architects Bath	not in top 100
architect Bath	not in top 100
architectural services Bath	not in top 100
house extension architect Bath	not in top 100
planning application architect Bath	not in top 100
listed building architect Bath	not in top 100
residential architects Bath	not in top 100
commercial architects Bath	not in top 100
self build architect Bath	not in top 100
loft conversion architect Bath	not in top 100
barn conversion architect Bath	not in top 100
conservation architect Bath	not in top 100

The gap to the leader

This firm against the sector median and the index leader, Designscape Architects, on every pillar.

Speed & CWV		55
Technical		100
Local presence		85
Visibility		0
AI search presence		20
Content & trust		55

this firm sector median leader

Studio Four Point Ten Architects trails Designscape Architects by 142 points across 4 pillars, but 68% of that is Visibility and Speed & CWV alone. It already matches or beats the leader on Technical, Content & trust.

AI search presence

Named in 1 of 5 AI answers. A domain citation is stronger evidence than a name mention.

✗	Who are the best architects in Bath?
✗	Which architect in Bath would you recommend for a house extension?
✗	Top rated architectural practices in Bath
✗	I need an architect in Bath - who should I contact?
✓	Conservation architects in Bath	cited by domain

Local presence

Google Business Profile.

Rating	5 / 5
Reviews	5
Locations	1
Reviews in last 90 days	0
Address matches website	yes

What customers talk about

Themes Google extracted from this business’s reviews, by how often customers raise them. Not scored — this is what people say, not how findable the business is.

• expertise3
• presentation and proposal2
• sensitivity to needs2
• attention to detail2
• attention2

Why this score

What each score is made of. Every input here is in the open dataset, so the arithmetic can be checked rather than taken on trust.

Pillar	Score	Made up of
Content & trust	55	about page: yes · team page: no · credentials: no · blog or news: yes · homepage: 702 words
Visibility	0	ranks for 0 of 12 keywords · local 3-pack: 0
Local presence	85	5 reviews · rated 5 · 0 new in 90 days
Technical	100	HTTPS: — · page allows indexing: — · robots.txt allows crawling: yes · sitemap: yes · structured data: —

Key findings

• No pillar falls materially below the sector median this quarter.

How this compares to the leader

Designscape Architects leads the index with 80/100. The largest gaps are: Visibility (0 vs 53); Speed & CWV (55 vs 99); AI search presence (20 vs 60).

Top fixes (ranked by impact)

1. Build local landing pages for the core keyword basket to lift organic and local-pack appearance.
2. Publish structured, citable content and entity schema so AI engines surface the business for core local queries.
3. Cut mobile LCP below 2.5s (optimise images and remove render-blocking resources) — the biggest score and ranking lever.

Firms ranked near this one

The firms nearest Studio Four Point Ten Architects in this ranking, beyond the two either side.

Firm	Rank	Score	Why it is here
Sicolo Webb Architects	#19	57/100	2 places above you
Donald Insall Associates	#23	55/100	2 places below you
Hetreed Ross Architects	#18	57/100	3 places above you
Marptree Design & Build limited	#24	55/100	3 places below you

Context (not scored)

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 56 · accessibility 96 · best practices 81 · SEO 100 — biggest losses: Does not use HTTPS; Links do not have a discernible name; Reduce unused JavaScript
Google profile detail	34 photos · claimed · has a description · hours listed · 0 of 5 reviews are one star
Backlinks	46 referring domains · 64 links · rank 0
Site structure	1 pages crawled · 38 internal links per page · reachable in: contact 1 click, about 1 click · 0% of links use a generic anchor · 156 sitemap pages not reachable by following links
Sitemap	156 URLs listed · declared in robots.txt · newest entry 13 days old · 5 of 5 sampled URLs resolve

Where to get this fixed

Studio Four Point Ten Architects’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.
• AI search presence (20/100) — read generative engine optimisation on getting named by the answer engines this pillar measures. Background on analysing this pillar: ai search presence.

↑ Ranked aboveSRA Architects#20 · 57/100 Full indexAll 80 firms ↓ Ranked belowBath Heritage Building ltd#22 · 56/100

---

How this is measured: see the index methodology, and the statistical methods behind each pillar. This index is published by PYC; if you want this score moved, start here.