The State of Concrete Contractor Websites in Canada, 2026
We scored 103 Canadian concrete contractor websites across ten cities on one 100-point test, on a phone. The median site scored 56 out of 100 and 58% earned an F. The median site took 9.6 seconds to show its main content, only 50% had a quote form on the homepage, and 3% gave any price guidance.
Executive summary
median score across 103 sites
Range 26 to 83scored an F, under 60 points
60 of 103 sitesmedian time for the main content to appear on a phone
Google’s good threshold is 2.5sgave any price guidance at all
The first question a homeowner hasConcrete is a phone-first trade with a speed problem.
A homeowner looking for a concrete contractor is usually standing in the driveway that needs replacing, holding a phone. So we tested every site that way: a phone-sized screen, a phone browser, and Google’s own speed tool on its mobile settings.
The basics are mostly there. 100% of sites use HTTPS, 81% put their city in the homepage title, and 66% show a tappable phone number on the first phone screen. The things that take more care are rare. The median site took 9.6 seconds to show its main content, and only 6% landed in Google’s good range. Only 50% had a quote form on the homepage, 46% showed reviews there, and 3% said anything at all about price.
That is the opportunity in one paragraph. A concrete company that fixes speed, puts the phone and a short form on the first screen, and shows its reviews and a price range, is ahead of most of the country.
Five findings from the 2026 sample
The sites are slow on a phone.
The median concrete site took 9.6 seconds to show its main content. 82% were over Google’s four-second poor line, while their scripts and layout were mostly fine.
Half have no quote form on the homepage.
50% of sites make the homeowner go looking for a way to ask for a quote. 86% of the best quarter have one.
Price is the question nobody answers.
Only 3% gave any price guidance, a range or a starting figure, on a purchase that can cost as much as a car.
Reviews stay on Google.
Only 46% show reviews on the homepage and 36% carry written testimonials, so the proof a homeowner wants is one tab away.
Almost nobody can measure what works.
7% run call tracking and 20% carry a Google Ads tag, so most concrete companies cannot tie a job back to the marketing that produced it.
The bar is low, and it is the same everywhere.
The gaps repeat in every one of the ten cities. None of them need a big budget to fix; they need someone to fix them once.
Where the gap is biggest
We split the sites into the best quarter (a score of 66 or more, 28 sites) and the worst quarter (45 or less, 30 sites). The biggest differences are not in anything expensive.
| What the site has | Best quarter | Worst quarter | Gap |
|---|---|---|---|
| Quote form on the homepage | 86% | 13% | 72 pts |
| Phone number on the first phone screen | 93% | 20% | 73 pts |
| Local business schema | 86% | 23% | 62 pts |
| Reviews on the homepage | 71% | 20% | 51 pts |
| A warranty or guarantee stated | 64% | 27% | 38 pts |
| A blog or guides section | 43% | 10% | 33 pts |
| City name in the homepage title | 89% | 73% | 16 pts |
Average score in each category, as a share of the points available
All 103 sites
Lead capture and trust are where the field is weakest: the average site earned 47% of the lead-capture points and 45% of the trust points. Those are the two categories that decide whether a visitor becomes a phone call.
Grade distribution
We used ordinary school grades so the scores mean something at a glance: A is 90 or more, B is 80 to 89, C is 70 to 79, D is 60 to 69, and F is under 60.
Concrete contractor websites by grade
103 Canadian sites, September 2026
Every site’s score
One dot per site. The line marks the median.
Speed on a phone
These numbers come from Google Lighthouse on its standard mobile settings, the same test behind PageSpeed Insights: a mid-range phone on a slow 4G connection. We ran one site at a time so the timings are comparable.
To provide a good user experience, sites should strive to have Largest Contentful Paint of 2.5 seconds or less.
web.dev, Largest Contentful Paint (LCP), Google
Largest Contentful Paint on a phone
One dot per site. Sites slower than 25 seconds are drawn at 25.
| Measure, mobile | Median | What good looks like |
|---|---|---|
| Lighthouse performance score | 62/100 | 90 or more |
| Largest Contentful Paint | 9.6s | 2.5s or less |
| Cumulative Layout Shift | 0.00 | 0.1 or less |
| Total Blocking Time | 142ms | 200ms or less |
| Page weight | 2.9 MB | As small as the page allows |
The pattern is consistent: layout is mostly stable and scripts are mostly light, but the main content arrives late. 82% of sites took more than four seconds to show it. Slow main content with light scripts usually points to oversized images or a slow server rather than heavy code, and oversized images are the cheapest speed problem there is to fix.
The first screen
On a phone, the first screen is the whole pitch. We recorded what a homeowner could tap without scrolling, and only counted an element if it was really on screen and not hidden behind a menu.
What a homeowner sees before scrolling
103 sites on a 390 x 844 phone screen
Catching the lead
How sites turn a visitor into an enquiry
103 sites
A tap-to-call link is nearly universal, which is good, because calls are how most concrete work starts. What is missing is a way to reach the company that is not a call. Only 14% offer chat or online booking, which matters for the homeowner who researches at nine at night. And only 7% run any call-tracking tool, so the calls that do come in cannot be tied back to what produced them.
Trust signals
What sites show to earn trust
103 sites
Most sites say how long they have been in business and show some photos of their work. Far fewer show the things a nervous homeowner actually checks: reviews, proof of insurance, and a warranty in writing. Price guidance is almost entirely absent. Not a quote, just a range: “most driveways here land between this and this.” It is the question behind every call, and 97% of sites leave it unanswered.
Local search basics
What search engines see
103 sites
The simplest local signal, the city in the homepage title, is on 81% of sites. The more deliberate work is rarer: local business schema on 50%, and any guides or blog on only 30%. The median site that published a sitemap had 23 pages. A concrete company with a page for each job it wants more of is competing against sites that mostly have one services page.
Accessibility
We ran axe-core, the open-source accessibility checker, against every homepage for WCAG 2.1 A and AA. 72% had no critical violations and 13% had no serious ones.
Most common accessibility failures
Share of sites with at least one
For most concrete companies this is not a legal matter; it is a sales one. Low-contrast text is hard to read in sunlight on a phone, which is exactly where a homeowner reads it. In Ontario, businesses with 50 or more employees are required to meet WCAG 2.0 AA on their websites, so larger firms there have a compliance reason as well.
The tech behind the sites
Website platform
Share of 103 sites
Marketing tags installed
Share of 103 sites
WordPress runs 56% of the sites, and among those the Elementor page builder is the most common way they are built. The platform did not decide the score: there were fast, well-built sites and slow, thin sites on every major platform. What decided it was whether anyone had set the site up for a phone and a homeowner.
City by city
The samples are small, 7 to 14 sites per city, so read these as a guide rather than a ranking. Each city page has its own breakdown.
| City | Sites | Median score | Median LCP | Phone on first screen | Homepage form | Reviews shown |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Calgary | 12 | 61 | 10.7s | 75% | 58% | 83% |
| Kelowna | 9 | 60 | 11.5s | 67% | 56% | 44% |
| Vancouver | 14 | 57 | 8.9s | 93% | 50% | 36% |
| Toronto | 12 | 57 | 9.5s | 58% | 33% | 75% |
| Ottawa | 10 | 57 | 7.4s | 50% | 60% | 30% |
| Abbotsford | 7 | 54 | 15.1s | 86% | 43% | 57% |
| Edmonton | 11 | 53 | 11.0s | 73% | 64% | 27% |
| Victoria | 9 | 49 | 5.9s | 44% | 56% | 33% |
| Surrey | 9 | 47 | 9.0s | 56% | 67% | 33% |
| Winnipeg | 10 | 42 | 11.7s | 50% | 10% | 30% |
What the best sites do
None of the 103 sites earned an A. The best quarter had these things in common, and every one of them is a one-time fix:
- The phone number and a quote button on the first phone screen. 93% of the best quarter had the phone number there, against 20% of the worst.
- A short quote form on the homepage. 86% against 13%.
- Reviews shown where the homeowner is deciding. 71% against 20%.
- Local business schema that matches the Google profile. 86% against 23%.
- A warranty or guarantee in writing. 64% against 27%.
- Guides that answer homeowners’ questions. 43% against 10%.
Add to that list the two things almost nobody does yet, compressed images so the page loads in under three seconds and a price range for the common jobs, and a concrete website moves from the middle of the field to the top of it. Our website checklist walks through each one.
How we measured this
The sample
For each of ten cities we searched for concrete contractors the way a homeowner would, using ordinary search, and kept the contractors’ own websites. We removed directories, lead platforms, suppliers, companies outside Canada, and any business that is a client of ours. That left 114 sites. 11 could not be scored: some blocked automated visitors, and some domains had lapsed or returned errors. The published results cover the other 103.
The test
Each homepage was opened in Chromium on a 390 by 844 screen with a phone browser identity, the way a homeowner meets it. We recorded what was really visible on the first screen, read the rendered page for trust and conversion signals, ran axe-core 4.13.0 for accessibility, and fetched the robots file and sitemap for page counts. Separately, we ran Google Lighthouse 13.5.0 on its default mobile settings, one site at a time. A second pass looked for call-tracking tools, including those loaded through Tag Manager.
The 100-point framework
| Category | Points | What earns them |
|---|---|---|
| First impression | 20 | HTTPS 3, mobile viewport 2, phone number on the first screen 6, quote or contact button on the first screen 5, exactly one H1 4 |
| Speed | 20 | Lighthouse mobile performance scaled to 10, LCP 2.5s or less 6 (4s or less 3), CLS 0.1 or less 4 (0.25 or less 2) |
| Trust | 20 | Reviews on the homepage 6, testimonials 3, years in business 3, licensed, insured or WCB 4, warranty or guarantee 4 |
| Lead capture | 15 | Homepage quote form 6, six fields or fewer 3, tap-to-call link 3, chat or online booking 3 |
| Local SEO | 15 | City in the title 4, meta description 50 to 170 characters 2, local business schema 4, three or more service pages 3, a blog 2 |
| Accessibility | 10 | No critical axe violations 5, no serious ones 3 (ten or fewer 1), alt text on 90% of images 2 |
What this does not measure
It is a homepage test. Some companies have strong service pages behind a weak homepage, and a few load chat or review widgets only after a click, which we would miss. Text signals such as “licensed” or “warranty” are read from the page, so a claim made in an image is not counted. Lighthouse numbers vary a little from run to run. None of this changes the overall pattern, but it is why no individual site is named.
Citing this report
You are welcome to use these numbers. Please cite and link:
Concrete Marketing (2026). State of Concrete Contractor Websites in Canada, 2026. 103 sites scored. https://concretemarketing.ca/blog/state-of-concrete-contractor-websites-2026/
Glossary
- Largest Contentful Paint (LCP)
- How long until the biggest thing on the first screen, usually the main photo or headline, has appeared. Google’s good threshold is 2.5 seconds.
- Cumulative Layout Shift (CLS)
- How much the page jumps around while it loads. Under 0.1 is good.
- Lighthouse
- Google’s free tool for measuring page speed and quality. PageSpeed Insights uses it.
- Local business schema
- A block of code that tells search engines your business name, address, phone number and service area in a form they can read reliably.
- axe-core
- An open-source accessibility checker used by browser developer tools and accessibility auditors.
- Call tracking
- A service that shows a different phone number depending on where a visitor came from, so you can tell which marketing produced each call.
- First screen
- What is visible on a phone before scrolling. On our test screen, the top 844 pixels.
Questions
How good is the average concrete contractor website in Canada?
Not very. The median site in our sample of 103 scored 56 out of 100 on a test built around what a homeowner needs on a phone. 60 of the 103 sites scored an F and none scored an A.
How fast should a concrete contractor website load?
Google’s good threshold for Largest Contentful Paint is 2.5 seconds or less on a phone. Only 6% of the concrete sites we measured met it. The median took 9.6 seconds.
What is the most common problem on concrete websites?
Speed, by a distance: 82% of sites took longer than four seconds to show their main content on a phone. After that, missing price guidance (97% gave none), no quote form on the homepage (50%) and no reviews on the homepage (54%).
Which website platform do concrete contractors use?
WordPress, on 58 of the 103 sites we could identify. The platform made less difference than what was done with it: fast, well-built sites existed on every major platform.
Can I use these numbers?
Yes. Quote them and link back to this page so a reader can check the method. The citation format is below.
Why are no companies named?
Because the point is the pattern, not a list of whose website is bad. Many of these are good concrete companies with websites that do not show it.
