Skip to content

Every index compared: what trade and area actually explain

Each Local Digital Visibility Index covers one trade in one town, and until now they could only be read one at a time. There are 34 of them: 1371 businesses across 11 trades and 8 towns, all scored the same way.

This page reads them together. Every figure is computed from the published datasets when the page is built.

IndexTownTradeFirmsMedian score
Exeter SolicitorExetersolicitors873
Swindon Estate AgentSwindonestate agents870.5
Bath Estate AgentBathestate agents1566
Cheltenham Law FirmCheltenhamlaw firms864.5
Bristol DentistBristoldentists959
Bristol Estate AgentBristolestate agents1859
Swindon VetSwindonveterinary practices1758
Cheltenham VetCheltenhamveterinary practices2057.5
Worcester VetWorcesterveterinary practices1557
Bristol VetBristolveterinary practices2956
Swindon PhysiotherapySwindonphysiotherapy clinics4054
Bristol PhysiotherapyBristolphysiotherapy clinics6253
Exeter PhysiotherapyExeterphysiotherapy clinics5353
Gloucester AccountantGloucesteraccountants4153
Worcester ArchitectWorcesterarchitects2553
Gloucester PhysiotherapyGloucesterphysiotherapy clinics4652.5
Cheltenham PhysiotherapyCheltenhamphysiotherapy clinics6852
Exeter ArchitectExeterarchitects6352
Exeter VetExeterveterinary practices2152
Gloucester VetGloucesterveterinary practices2152
Bath PhysiotherapyBathphysiotherapy clinics6751
Bath ArchitectBatharchitects8050
Bristol Double GlazingBristoldouble glazing companies11650
Cheltenham ArchitectCheltenhamarchitects5950
Gloucester ConstructionGloucesterconstruction firms1350
Gloucester RestaurantGloucesterrestaurants4450
Gloucestershire Double GlazingGloucestershiredouble glazing companies9950
Bath VetBathveterinary practices1049
Bristol ArchitectBristolarchitects8049
Gloucester ArchitectGloucesterarchitects3549
Swindon ArchitectSwindonarchitects2949
Worcester ConstructionWorcesterconstruction firms5548
Worcester PhysiotherapyWorcesterphysiotherapy clinics4548
Cheltenham ConstructionCheltenhamconstruction firms5246

The spread runs from 73 (Exeter Solicitor) to 46 (Cheltenham Construction), against a pooled median of 51.

Before reading anything into that order: the cohorts are very uneven. The largest holds 116 businesses and the smallest 8. A median drawn from eight firms moves if two of them change.

The obvious question, and the data answers it in a way that undercuts both options.

Share of the variation in Digital Visibility Score explained by each factor, across 1371 businesses. Sector and town overlap, so the first two do not add up.
  • Which trade you are in
    11 sectors
    9.9%
  • Which town you are in
    8 towns
    2%
  • Both together
    34 cohorts
    11.9%
  • Everything else
    differences between businesses in the same trade and town
    88.1%

Trade explains 9.9% of the variation between businesses. Town explains 2%. Both together explain 11.9%.

Which leaves 88.1% — about seven eighths — as differences between businesses in the same trade in the same area.

That is the most useful finding on this page. The two explanations a business reaches for first, everyone in my trade is like this and it’s harder here, together account for 11.9% of what separates the best from the worst. Most of the difference is between you and the firm down the road doing the same job in the same place.

That share got larger, not smaller, when the index tripled in size. On eleven indices trade and area explained about a third; on 34 they explain 11.9%. Adding three trades and 885 businesses did not reveal a trade effect that the smaller sample had hidden.

Some trades appear in more than one area, and some areas hold more than one trade, which lets the two be separated a little.

Same trade, different areasAreasIndex mediansSpread
estate agents359 · 66 · 70.511.5
veterinary practices749 · 52 · 52 · 56 · 57 · 57.5 · 589
physiotherapy clinics748 · 51 · 52 · 52.5 · 53 · 53 · 546
architects749 · 49 · 49 · 50 · 50 · 52 · 534
construction firms346 · 48 · 504
double glazing companies250 · 500
Same area, different tradesTradesIndex mediansSpread
Swindon449 · 54 · 58 · 70.521.5
Exeter452 · 52 · 53 · 7321
Cheltenham546 · 50 · 52 · 57.5 · 64.518.5
Bath449 · 50 · 51 · 6617
Bristol649 · 50 · 53 · 56 · 59 · 5910
Worcester448 · 48 · 53 · 579
Gloucester649 · 50 · 50 · 52 · 52.5 · 534

Architects sit between 49 and 53 across all 7 areas they are measured in, a spread of 4 points — the trade travels with the firms. Estate agents vary more than twice as widely by area, 11.5 points. And the single widest gap anywhere is within one town: Swindon, where 4 trades sit 21.5 points apart on the same streets.

Median pillar score for each trade, across 1371 businesses. Read a row for what a sector looks like; read a column for whether that pillar tells trades apart at all.
SectorFirmsSpeed & CWVTechnicalLocal presenceVisibilityAI search presenceContent & trustScore
solicitors871.510080.542.5507073
law firms87775.57738307764.5
estate agents41698883.537207064
dentists95888832907059
veterinary practices13365.588781005354
accountants4165.575791305453
physiotherapy clinics381628875405352
architects371647576004050
double glazing companies215638872004050
restaurants446975840026.550
construction firms120617576003748

Cohorts are uneven — 8 businesses in the smallest, 381 in the largest — so a median from a small trade moves on a few firms. Local presence carries a known sector effect and is the one column to read with most caution.

Read the columns rather than the rows and the point arrives immediately.

Local presence varies by only 12 points between the best and worst trade, and it carries 20% of every score. The other pillars measuring the website itself are nearly as flat. Every trade has broadly the same website quality.

Content & trust varies by 50.5 points. So do the other two pillars about publishing and being found. The trades at the top of the table publish things and appear in results; the trades at the bottom have comparable websites and are invisible.

Restaurants are the clearest case. They top the table on Local presence — busy Google profiles, plenty of reviews — and sit last on content, with a median search visibility of zero. A restaurant is findable on a map and absent from a search. Architects and construction firms share that zero, from much weaker Google profiles.

The design is unbalanced and observational. Not every trade appears in every town, cohorts run from 8 to 116 firms, and the trades were not chosen at random. The variance shares above describe the businesses we measured; they are not estimates about UK business in general.

Trade and town are entangled. Because the coverage is incomplete, some of what is attributed to trade is really town and the reverse. That is why both figures are reported separately and the two are not added together.

Local presence deserves particular caution. That pillar includes review velocity, which is substantially a property of a trade rather than of a business. Comparing it across sectors compares review cultures.

One quarter is not a pattern. Every figure here is Q3-2026, including the 23 indices added on 1 September, which were measured into the same quarter rather than starting a new one. The second measurement is the real test, and the sensible use of this page is to check afterwards which of these relationships survived.

If you run one of these businesses, the ranking of trades is the least useful thing here. The useful part is the 88.1%.

Your trade and your town set the conditions. They do not set your score. 88.1% of what separates the best firm in your index from the worst is neither, and on the evidence of the fingerprint above it is concentrated in whether you have published anything worth finding.

The scorecard for your own business names the specific faults, and the Digital Visibility Score page explains what the number is made of.