Strong on one side of the map, absent on the other
High value, slow decision, several markets at once
Roofing sits at the opposite end of the spectrum from emergency trades. The jobs are large, the decision takes weeks, and the customer usually contacts several contractors before committing. Being present throughout that window matters more than being first on any single day.
It is also a trade where one business routinely covers several towns from one base. That means visibility is not a single number in any useful sense. It varies by direction as much as by distance.
A shape that distance could not explain
The first measurement across the covered area produced a distribution that was solid on one side and effectively empty on the other, at comparable distances from the base. Distance alone does not produce that shape.
A one-sided gap at equal radius almost always means another business is strong there. Running the same frame for the contractors holding that side confirmed it within an afternoon.
The second finding was less expected. The categories and service list did not describe most of what the business sold. So across a large part of the area it was competing for the wrong queries entirely.
Diagnose the shape, then fix the record
The competitor scan was what turned an unexplained gap into a specific, checkable finding.
Record the baseline distribution
The full covered area on one frame, before anything changed. So the direction of the gap was documented rather than remembered.
Run the same frame for rivals
Your own series cannot separate your weakness from someone else's strength. The competitor scan is what made the gap readable.
Correct categories and services
Brought into line with what is sold. It changed which searches the business was eligible for across most of the area.
Reconcile the details everywhere
Address, hours and phone made the same across the profile, the website and the directories carrying them. So the sources stopped disagreeing.
The weak side closed first
Re-measured on the same frame, with the competitor scan repeated alongside it so relative movement could be read rather than assumed.
Around 250% growth means about three and a half times the starting point. The figure covers calls and direction requests attributed to the business profile, per location. It is not revenue and it is not a ranking position.
- The gap was competitive, not geographic. Nothing in the business’s own data could have established that. The competitor scan did it in an afternoon.
- Category and service accuracy moved more than anything added later. The same pattern held in all three sectors.
- Consistency across sources mattered here more than elsewhere. Because a long consideration cycle gives a customer more chances to notice a contradiction.
- Roughly 250% growth in calls and direction requests per location, measured against the baseline taken first.
What this does not claim
The measurement covers visibility and the outcomes attributed to the profile. In a trade with a weeks-long decision cycle, some of the eventual work will trace to sources no profile metric captures.
Competitor movement was recorded, not controlled. Where a rival also improved, the relative reading is what carries meaning, not the absolute one.
The figure is calls and direction requests, not contracts won and not revenue.
Questions about this account
Why run scans for competitors at all?
Because your own series cannot separate your decline from a rival's improvement. Without that variable, three explanations fit every movement equally well.
What made the gap look competitive rather than geographic?
It was one-sided at comparable distances from the base. Distance produces roughly symmetrical decay; a competitor produces an asymmetric one.
Did the competitors also change during the period?
Some movement was observed, which is why the reading is relative rather than absolute. That is the honest way to report it.
Why did consistency matter more in roofing?
A weeks-long decision gives a customer several opportunities to check details across sources. So a contradiction has more chances to be noticed.
How many keywords were tracked?
A small set that produces enquiries. Tracking twenty produces a series nobody reviews, which is functionally the same as tracking none.
Is the figure quotes or contracts?
Neither. It is calls and direction requests attributed to the profile. Converting that to contracts is a separate exercise this does not attempt.
Start with a baseline of your own.
Every result above depends on a measurement taken before anything changed. $5.33 per location per month, all 42 tools.