Search stopped being about matching strings some time ago and became about recognising things — people, products, places, standards, companies. This tool reads a page as a set of entities rather than a bag of words and asks whether the set is the one a knowledgeable page on the subject would contain. Scores sit in the middle of the dataset, which is roughly what you would expect: most pages mention some of the right things and few mention most of them.
Here is where that sits. The median is 67/100, which ranks it 12 of the 25 measures in this dataset. The middle half of results falls between 19 and 81 — a band 62 points wide. That is wide: sites genuinely diverge here, which is to say getting ahead is still possible.
How the scores are distributed
An average on its own misleads. The chart below splits all 1,433 scans into five score bands, totalling 100%. Scores collect at both ends and hollow out in the middle — the mark of a check that has either been done or not done at all, with little partial credit in between.
- 0–19
- 20–39
- 40–59
- 60–79
- 80–100
| Score band | Entity Coverage |
|---|---|
| 0–19 | 28% · 398 |
| 20–39 | 16% · 235 |
| 40–59 | 5% · 77 |
| 60–79 | 19% · 266 |
| 80–100 | 32% · 457 |
| Total runs | 1,433 |
The grade mix
The same data as letters: A+ 95–100, A 85–94, B 75–84, C 65–74, D 50–64 and F below 50.
Where your score stands
Read this as coverage, not correctness. A high score means the page touches the concepts a reader would expect to see; it does not mean it says anything true or useful about them. The honest use of a low score is as a prompt: is there something obvious this page should have covered and did not?
| Tool | 10th | 25th | Median | 75th | 90th | Mean | Lowest | Highest |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Entity Coverage | 0 | 19 | 67 | 81 | 81 | 49.2 | 0 | 81 |
How to read it: 19 is bottom-quartile, 67 is a typical page, 81 starts the upper quartile and 81 or above is the top 10%. These thresholds apply to this tool only.
The checks that fail most
The checks look at three separate properties, and it is worth keeping them apart. Whether enough distinct entities appear at all. Whether they recur, since a single mention reads as incidental. And whether structured data confirms which entity is meant, because "Mercury" is a planet, a metal, a car and a record label until something says otherwise.
| Check | Did not pass | Weight |
|---|---|---|
| Entities in structured data | 100% | Partial |
| Entities reinforced (repeated) | 63% | Partial |
| Distinct entities covered | 50% | Hard fail |
| Healthy entity density | 25% | Partial |
| Broad supporting vocabulary | 19% | Partial |
“Hard fail” means the check’s full weighting is lost; “partial” means only part of the score is. Rates are the share of scans in which the check ran and did not pass.
The weakest areas
This tool groups its checks into categories. The chart below shows how often each category was the lowest-scoring one in a scan — which area is most often the weak link. It is not the average score in that category; it is how often it came last.
“Topic Focus” was the weakest area in 58% of scans.
What to fix first
Rather than adding entity mentions, add a section covering an aspect of the subject the page currently skips — the entities come with it, naturally and in context. Padding a page with names is the version of this that does not work and is easy to spot, both for a reader and for a machine.
A typical scan passes 2.4 of 5 checks and leaves 2.6 open items behind. What drags a score down is usually not one catastrophe but accumulated small omissions.
Run the Entity Coverage Analyzer on your own page
Month by month
The figures on this page are replaced at every refresh. At the end of each month a permanent edition is published for that month and never edited again — which is the only reason this series can be compared at all. One edition has been published so far; when the second lands this section will set the two months side by side.
| Edition | Median | vs. previous | Scored 80+ | Issues/run | Runs |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| August 2026 | 67 | baseline | 32% | 2.6 | 1,433 |
Frequently asked questions
What counts as an entity?
Anything specific enough to be identified and connected to existing knowledge: a named person, an organisation, a product, a place, a standard, a date, a defined concept. The test is whether a system could resolve it to a particular thing rather than a general category — "the framework" is not an entity, the framework's name is.
Is this keyword research by another name?
No. Keyword research asks what people type; entity coverage asks what a subject is made of. The two overlap but they answer different questions, and the second one is stable — the entities in a subject barely change while the phrasings people search with change constantly.
Can a page cover too many entities?
Yes, and it shows up as a page that is about everything and therefore about nothing. Density matters as much as count: a page mentioning forty entities once each reads as a list, while a page returning to eight of them reads as being about those eight. Focus is a signal, not just a courtesy to the reader.
What is a good score on the Entity Coverage Analyzer?
In this dataset the median is 67/100, so scoring 67 puts you exactly in the middle. 81 is the start of the upper quartile and 81 or above is the top 10%; below 19 is the bottom quarter. Those thresholds are specific to this tool — the 25 measures in this dataset have very different medians, so 70 here and 70 elsewhere do not mean the same thing.
Which check fails most often on the Entity Coverage Analyzer?
“Entities in structured data”, which did not pass in 100% of scans. The costliest failures, though, are the ones scored as hard fails — this tool has 1, the most common being “Distinct entities covered” at 50%.
Questions that govern the whole series — how the sample is collected, how sites are anonymized, how often the figures are refreshed — are answered in the methodology on the hub.
Using this data
The figures, tables and charts on this page are free to reuse under CC BY 4.0; the only condition is a link back to this page. Suggested citation: SeoMods — Entity Coverage Analyzer benchmarks, 2 September 2026, https://seomods.com/seo-score-benchmarks/entity-coverage-analyzer. If you need to cite by date, use the August 2026 edition instead: this page changes at every refresh and that one never does.