This market was created from the customer's normalized search intent. Google discovery uses the intent-aware query; the published NextDoorScore score still uses the existing methodology.
Search captured: veterinarian in st cloud mn
Listing names, ratings, and addresses shown for this comparison are from Google, refreshed when needed. SEOuP stores Place IDs and its own observations, not a permanent copy of Google listings. Observed search: “Veterinarian in St. Cloud, MN”.
Veterinarians in St. Cloud, MN — compared by Google rating, reviews & local visibility
Real competitive search intelligence benchmark for veterinarians providers in St. Cloud, MN. Evaluates observable local visibility, technical website health, service content depth, and customer reputation derived from actual NextDoorScore observations.
🏢 8 Providers Analyzed🎯 Market Median Score: 69.32/100⭐ Median Reviews: 308📡 251 Attributable Measurements
Sort Comparison By:
City map view · St. Cloud, MN
These are the businesses in this comparison, placed on their real coordinates. Top comparison businesses stay labeled. Geographic position is location only — it is not a score.
Marker Legend
Top comparison businesses
Other businesses
3Clustered businesses
Mapped businesses: 8
Labels show comparison position, not a new score. Geographic position is location only.
8 mapped businesses shown.
Top 4 side by side
Observed Google position for this search. Individual quotes appear only when Google Places returned review text. Listing names, ratings, and addresses shown for this comparison are from Google, refreshed when needed. SEOuP stores Place IDs and its own observations, not a permanent copy of Google listings.
“I have taken my kitten Juniper here twice now for her shots. They are a little more expensive and I barely got a few words in with the vet himself. The wait ti…”Danika King · Google listing
Local Visibility: +17.5 above market median (100 vs 82.5)[1][2]
Largest Observed Gap
Entity Consistency: -16.67 below market median (0 vs 16.67)[1][2]
Granite City Pet Hospital was observed at position #1 for the "Veterinarian in St. Cloud, MN" search during SEOuP's September 29, 2026 observation.
Why This Business Differs Online
Granite City Pet Hospital is 17.5 points above the measured market median for local visibility (100 versus 82.5). Its entity consistency score is 16.67 points below the measured market median (0 versus 16.67). Observed review volume is 818 versus a market median of 308; this is a volume comparison, not a service-quality assessment. First measured action: Add accessible business contact information.[1][2][3]
Largest Observable Opportunity: Add accessible business contact information[1][2]
Entity Consistency: +58.33 above market median (75 vs 16.67)[1][2]
Largest Observed Gap
Reviews: -9.18 below market median (77.45 vs 86.63)[1][2]
BluePearl Pet Hospital was observed at position #2 for the "Veterinarian in St. Cloud, MN" search during SEOuP's September 29, 2026 observation. 1 business appeared above it in that same observation.
BluePearl Pet Hospital is 58.33 points above the measured market median for entity consistency (75 versus 16.67). Its reviews score is 9.18 points below the measured market median (77.45 versus 86.63). Observed review volume is 306 versus a market median of 308; this is a volume comparison, not a service-quality assessment. First measured action: Review the public review-volume gap relative to this market.[1][2][3]
Largest Observable Opportunity: Review the public review-volume gap relative to this market[1][2]
Entity Consistency: +16.66 above market median (33.33 vs 16.67)[1][2]
Largest Observed Gap
Reviews: -0.34 below market median (86.29 vs 86.63)[1][2]
Companions Animal Hospital was observed at position #3 for the "Veterinarian in St. Cloud, MN" search during SEOuP's September 29, 2026 observation. 2 businesses appeared above it in that same observation.
Companions Animal Hospital is 16.66 points above the measured market median for entity consistency (33.33 versus 16.67). Its reviews score is 0.34 points below the measured market median (86.29 versus 86.63). Observed review volume is 299 versus a market median of 308; this is a volume comparison, not a service-quality assessment. First measured action: Review the public review-volume gap relative to this market.[1][2][3]
Largest Observable Opportunity: Review the public review-volume gap relative to this market[1][2]
Local Visibility: +2.5 above market median (85 vs 82.5)[1][2]
Largest Observed Gap
Technical SEO: -41.67 below market median (33.33 vs 75)[1][2]
Advanced Care Pet Hospital was observed at position #4 for the "Veterinarian in St. Cloud, MN" search during SEOuP's September 29, 2026 observation. 3 businesses appeared above it in that same observation.
Advanced Care Pet Hospital is 2.5 points above the measured market median for local visibility (85 versus 82.5). Its technical seo score is 41.67 points below the measured market median (33.33 versus 75). Observed review volume is 377 versus a market median of 308; this is a volume comparison, not a service-quality assessment. First measured action: Review missing canonical tags on sampled pages.[1][2][3]
Largest Observable Opportunity: Review missing canonical tags on sampled pages[1][2]
Entity Consistency: +50 above market median (66.67 vs 16.67)[1][2]
Largest Observed Gap
Content Coverage: -25 below market median (0 vs 25)[1][2]
Boysen Animal Hospital PA was observed at position #5 for the "Veterinarian in St. Cloud, MN" search during SEOuP's September 29, 2026 observation. 4 businesses appeared above it in that same observation.
Boysen Animal Hospital PA is 50 points above the measured market median for entity consistency (66.67 versus 16.67). Its content coverage score is 25 points below the measured market median (0 versus 25). Observed review volume is 310 versus a market median of 308; this is a volume comparison, not a service-quality assessment. First measured action: Answer relevant service questions missing from the sampled content.[1][2][3]
Largest Observable Opportunity: Answer relevant service questions missing from the sampled content[1][2]
Technical SEO: -75 below market median (0 vs 75)[1][2]
Waite Park Veterinary Hospital was observed at position #6 for the "Veterinarian in St. Cloud, MN" search during SEOuP's September 29, 2026 observation. 5 businesses appeared above it in that same observation.
Waite Park Veterinary Hospital's technical seo score is 75 points below the measured market median (0 versus 75). Observed review volume is 279 versus a market median of 308; this is a volume comparison, not a service-quality assessment. First measured action: Review missing canonical tags on sampled pages.[1][2][3]
Largest Observable Opportunity: Review missing canonical tags on sampled pages[1][2]
Local Visibility: -12.5 below market median (70 vs 82.5)[1][2]
Pine Cone Pet Hospital was observed at position #7 for the "Veterinarian in St. Cloud, MN" search during SEOuP's September 29, 2026 observation. 6 businesses appeared above it in that same observation.
Pine Cone Pet Hospital's local visibility score is 12.5 points below the measured market median (70 versus 82.5). Observed review volume is 165 versus a market median of 308; this is a volume comparison, not a service-quality assessment. First measured action: Review the measured local-search visibility gap.[1][2][3]
Largest Observable Opportunity: Review the measured local-search visibility gap[1][2]
Reviews: +3.63 above market median (90.26 vs 86.63)[1][2]
Largest Observed Gap
Local Visibility: -17.5 below market median (65 vs 82.5)[1][2]
St Joseph Veterinary Clinic was observed at position #8 for the "Veterinarian in St. Cloud, MN" search during SEOuP's September 29, 2026 observation. 7 businesses appeared above it in that same observation.
St Joseph Veterinary Clinic is 3.63 points above the measured market median for reviews (90.26 versus 86.63). Its local visibility score is 17.5 points below the measured market median (65 versus 82.5). Observed review volume is 393 versus a market median of 308; this is a volume comparison, not a service-quality assessment. First measured action: Review the measured local-search visibility gap.[1][2][3]
Largest Observable Opportunity: Review the measured local-search visibility gap[1][2]
Who Has the Advantage? Factor Leaderboards
Independent rankings for each measured search factor within this snapshot. Ranks reflect observable digital data, not an endorsement.
Snapshot ID: e9c30df2-b694-45bb-b0cf-851232a6d5b8 · Scoring Cutoff (asOf): 2026-09-29 01:14 UTC · Published: 2026-09-29 01:14 UTC · Methodology Version: 1.1.0
This comparison is a published, immutable snapshot. Scores evaluate observable digital search signals (local visibility, website accessibility, service content, and reviews) and do not evaluate physical craftsmanship, licensing, or safety.
View Full Methodology Weights & Scoring Rules
Methodology Factor Weights:
Local Visibility (20%): Verified local-search position and explicitly observed category, location, and service-area relevance.
Local Profile (15%): Measured completeness of public local-profile information.
Reviews (15%): Observed public rating, review volume, and review recency when measured.
Technical SEO (20%): Explicitly measured website accessibility, metadata, indexability, and technical checks.
Content Coverage (15%): Detected relevant service, local, and supporting content within the sampled website.
Entity Consistency (15%): Explicit cross-source consistency checks and detected business identity information.
Scoring Rules:
Scores describe observable digital signals, not workmanship, customer service, licensing, safety, or business quality.
Each factor is the arithmetic mean of its measured signals on a 0–100 scale. Signal coverage is shown separately; absent or unavailable signals are never zeroes.
The overall score is the weighted mean of all six factors and is unavailable until every factor has at least one measured signal. Factor coverage can differ across businesses.
Only attributable observations at or before the fixed asOf date, no more than 90 days old, and not expired at asOf are scored. The latest observation for a signal controls its availability.
Boolean checks score 100 for true and 0 for false. Rating scores rating / 5 × 100. Review volume scores min(100, log10(count + 1) / 3 × 100), a disclosed saturation benchmark of 999 reviews, not a quality assessment.
Review recency scores exp(-days / 180) × 100. Verified local-search rank scores max(0, 1 - (rank - 1) / 20) × 100; discovery-list order is never a search rank.
Measured percentages are used directly. Broken-link count scores 100 only for an explicitly measured zero, otherwise 0. Scores and statistics round to two decimals.
Market statistics exclude unavailable values. Midrank percentile = 100 × (number below + half the number tied) / measured sample size; an all-tied sample is at the 50th percentile.
Opportunities describe measured gaps, not estimated traffic or revenue. Missing observations never create an opportunity. Raw observations, source references, and dates remain visible.
Observed Google position is the 1-based order returned by the configured Google Places text search for a specific query, location, and observation time. It is not a universal or permanent Google rank. SEOuP stores Place IDs and its own audit observations; Google listing fields are a short-lived display cache with required attribution.
™