Skip to content

Richard James — Swindon Estate Agent Digital Visibility Score

Digital Visibility Score: 77 / 100 · Rank 1 of 8

Measured 3 October 2026 via the PYC Swindon Estate Agent Digital Visibility Index. Every figure is objective and reproducible from the methodology. Spotted an error? Request a correction.

Each pillar scored 0–100 against the sector median for this index. The final column is this firm's distance from that median.
PillarScoreMedianvs median
Speed & CWV5463−9
Technical10094+6
Local presence8593.5−8.5
Visibility6537.5+27.5
AI search presence8010+70
Content & trust7080.5−10.5
Pillar performance against the sector median. Bars right of centre are above the median, left are below.
Speed & CWV-9
Technical+6
Local presence-8.5
Visibility+27.5
AI search presence+70
Content & trust-10.5
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 6.6 years ago.
Ranks for 9 of 12 keywords, average position 4.7, in the local 3-pack for 5 keywords.
KeywordPosition
estate agents Swindon#1
best estate agents Swindon#4
top estate agents Swindon#5
letting agents Swindonnot in top 100
sell my house Swindonnot in top 100
house valuation Swindon#3
property for sale Swindon#10
estate agent fees Swindon#5
rental properties Swindonnot in top 100
estate agents Old Town#6
estate agents Wroughton#1
letting agents Old Town#7
Named in 4 of 5 AI answers. A domain citation is stronger evidence than a name mention.
✓Who are the best estate agents in Swindon?named
✗Which estate agent in Swindon would you recommend for selling a house?
✓Top rated letting agents in Swindoncited by domain
✓I am looking for an estate agent in Swindon - who should I contact?named
✓Best estate agents in Old Town, Swindoncited by domain
Google Business Profile.
Rating4.77 / 5
Reviews677
Locations3
Reviews in last 90 days6
Address matches websiteyes
Largest Contentful Paint measured two ways: one throttled lab run, against 28 days of real Chrome users.
Lab (Lighthouse, mobile)24.9sone throttled load on a datacentre machine
Field (real users)2.7s75th percentile of actual Chrome visitors over 28 days

The lab figure is 9.2× the real-user figure. Both agree there is a problem, and the field data confirms real visitors are affected. This is worth fixing. The metric failing for real users is loading (LCP) and layout shift (CLS).

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.
  • selling property20
  • sales progressor11
  • dealing with solicitors7
  • efficient staff6
  • supportive staff6
  • viewings6
  • sales negotiator5
  • regular updates5
  • informative staff3
  • onward purchase2
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.
PillarScoreMade up of
Content & trust70about page: yes · people introduced: yes · credentials: no · blog or news: yes · homepage: 973 words · last changed: 2417 days ago
Visibility65ranks for 9 of 12 keywords · average position 4.7 · local 3-pack: 5
Local presence85677 reviews · rated 4.77 · 6 new in 90 days
Technical100HTTPS: yes · page allows indexing: yes · robots.txt allows crawling: yes · sitemap: yes · structured data: yes
  • Content & trust: 70/100, below the sector median of 80.5.
  1. Cut mobile LCP below 2.5s (optimise images and remove render-blocking resources) — the biggest score and ranking lever.
  2. Build local landing pages for the core keyword basket to lift organic and local-pack appearance.
  3. Introduce the people who do the work, on an about or team page and the credentials that matter in this sector (Propertymark, NAEA, The Property Ombudsman), and refresh stale content.
The firms nearest Richard James in this ranking, beyond the two either side.
FirmRankScoreWhy it is here
McFarlane#371/1002 places below you
Location Real Estate#465/1003 places below you
Chappells#562/1004 places below you
Connells Swindon Old Town#660/1005 places below you
Recorded alongside the measurement to make it easier to judge, but carrying no weight in the Digital Visibility Score. See the methodology.
Companies HouseNo confident match on the registered name
Real-user speed (CrUX)LCP 2693ms · INP 129ms · CLS 0.12 · does not pass Core Web Vitals
Lighthouse (lab, mobile)Performance 38 · accessibility 86 · best practices 54 · SEO 100 — biggest losses: Links do not have a discernible name; Uses third-party cookies; Reduce JavaScript execution time
Google profile detail4 photos · claimed · has a description · hours listed · 4 of 164 reviews are one star
Backlinks325 referring domains · 1601 links · rank 198 · 10 broken
Site structure25 pages crawled · 132.1 internal links per page · reachable in: contact 1 click, about 2 clicks, services 1 click · 5% of links use a generic anchor
Sitemap155 URLs listed · declared in robots.txt · newest entry 157 days old · 5 of 5 sampled URLs resolve

Richard James’s lowest-scoring pillars among those we publish remediation guidance for:

  • Visibility (65/100) and Content & trust (70/100) — read topical authority on why ranking breadth across a sector beats chasing single terms. Background on analysing these pillars: visibility, content & trust.

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.