The conservation architecture practice — Bath Architect Digital Visibility Score

Digital Visibility Score: 55 / 100 · Rank 26 of 80

Digital Visibility Score55/100Rank 26 of 80 · top 32%Problems found1The site has not changed in a long timeFurthest behind-11.5Local presence: 67 against a sector median of 78.5

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	72	63	+9
Technical	100	88	+12
Local presence	67	78.5	−11.5
Visibility	0	0	level
AI search presence	0	0	level
Content & trust	70	37	+33

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

Speed & CWV		+9
Technical		+12
Local presence		-11.5
Visibility		0
AI search presence		0
Content & trust		+33

Problems found

These are specific, checkable faults on the site — not opinions about it.

• Worth knowingThe site has not changed in a long timeThe homepage last reported a change 8.9 years ago.

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		72
Technical		100
Local presence		67
Visibility		0
AI search presence		0
Content & trust		70

this firm sector median leader

The conservation architecture practice trails Designscape Architects by 163 points across 4 pillars, but 69% of that is AI search presence and Visibility alone. It already matches or beats the leader on Technical, Content & trust.

AI search presence

Named in 0 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

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	70	about page: yes · team page: no · credentials: yes · blog or news: yes · homepage: 2,829 words · last changed: 3260 days ago
Visibility	0	ranks for 0 of 12 keywords · local 3-pack: 0
Local presence	67	0 reviews · 0 new in 90 days
Technical	100	HTTPS: yes · page allows indexing: yes · robots.txt allows crawling: yes · sitemap: yes · structured data: yes

Key findings

• Local presence: 67/100, below the sector median of 78.5.

How this compares to the leader

Designscape Architects leads the index with 80/100. The largest gaps are: AI search presence (0 vs 60); Visibility (0 vs 53); Speed & CWV (72 vs 99).

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. Restart Google review generation and complete the Business Profile to close the local-pack gap.

Firms ranked near this one

The firms nearest The conservation architecture practice in this ranking, beyond the two either side.

Firm	Rank	Score	Why it is here
Marptree Design & Build limited	#24	55/100	2 places above you
Lynea Architects Ltd	#28	54/100	2 places below you
Donald Insall Associates	#23	55/100	3 places above you
Klas Hyllén Architecture	#29	53/100	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 63 · accessibility 87 · best practices 78 · SEO 100 — biggest losses: Serves images with low resolution; Forced reflow; Use efficient cache lifetimes
Google profile detail	29 photos · claimed · has a description · hours listed
Backlinks	54 referring domains · 66 links · rank 70
Site structure	1 pages crawled · 0 internal links per page
Sitemap	declared in robots.txt · no lastmod dates

Where to get this fixed

The conservation architecture practice’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 (0/100) — read generative engine optimisation on getting named by the answer engines this pillar measures. Background on analysing this pillar: ai search presence.

↑ Ranked aboveStonewood Design#25 · 55/100 Full indexAll 80 firms ↓ Ranked belowFeilden Clegg Bradley Studios#27 · 54/100

---

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.