AuthorityLighthouse has nine client projects on the record. The smallest went from 34 monthly organic visits to 170 in six months. The largest went from 20,000 to 446,000 in a year and a half. Every figure on this page is monthly organic visits, taken from our own client records.
What makes this list different from most agency results pages is not the size of the numbers. It is that each row carries the number the client started with, plus the time it took. A percentage on its own tells you nothing. 500% growth could mean four visits became twenty. If you want the ground floor first, our guide to how search visibility works in Singapore covers what organic search is.
Some of the rows below are small, and they sit here for the same reason the big ones do.
The full record, nine projects
Here is the complete set. Nine projects, running from six months to five years, each with a starting figure, a finishing figure, and the time between them. Every number is monthly organic visits. Nothing has been left off this table, and nothing has been rounded to look better.
| Client | Monthly organic visits, start | Monthly organic visits, end | Time elapsed | Multiple | Full write-up |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nuffield Dental | 1,200 | 15,921 | 5 years | ~13× | Nuffield Dental engagement |
| Bybit | 20,000 | 446,000 | 1.5 years | ~22× | Bybit engagement |
| Storables | 6,000 | 243,000 | 2.5 years | ~40× | Storables engagement |
| Plastic surgery clinic | 300 | 1,200 | 1 year | 4× | plastic surgery clinic engagement |
| Aesthetic clinic | 52 | 653 | 1 year | ~12× | aesthetic clinic engagement |
| Chiropractic clinic | 1,363 | 1,819 | 6 months | ~1.3× | chiropractic clinic engagement |
| Hair-loss clinic | 101 | 269 | 6 months | ~2.7× | hair-loss clinic engagement |
| Beauty salon | 574 | 1,141 | 6 months | ~2× | beauty salon engagement |
| TCM clinic | 34 | 170 | 6 months | 5× | TCM clinic engagement |
Seven of the nine are Singapore clinics or health-adjacent practices. That is not a coincidence, and if you run one, it is the part of the record we would point to first.
The other two, Bybit and Storables, are much bigger operations in other fields. The last section explains what they are doing here.
The multiples in the fifth column are just arithmetic on the two columns beside them. They are the least useful thing in the table, so read the first three columns instead.
A table like this is only worth as much as the definition behind its numbers, so that is the next thing to settle.
What these numbers actually count
Every figure above is monthly organic visits. That means people arriving at the site from unpaid search results, in a typical month at the start compared with a typical month at the end. They are not ad clicks, not total website visitors, and not impressions. They come from the analytics and Search Console accounts each client owns.
The difference matters, because these words get used loosely. Google Analytics treats organic search as the channel where users “arrive at your site/app via non-ad links in organic-search results, including Google’s AI Overviews and AI Mode” (source: Google Analytics Help on the default channel group). That is the definition we work to.
Google’s own reporting tool draws a second line (source: Google Search Console Help on impressions, position, and clicks):
| The term | What it counts |
|---|---|
| An impression | A user having “seen (or potentially seen) a link to your site in Search, Discover, or News.” |
| A click | One that “sends the user to a page outside of Google Search”. |
Impressions run much larger and grow much more easily. A results page quoting them without saying so is worth a second look.
In the client accounts we manage, we report visits rather than rankings. A ranking is a position; a visit is a person. A page can sit at number three for a phrase nobody searches and produce nothing at all. We have inherited accounts where a year of reporting rested on exactly that. Visits are harder to make look good, which is the point of using them.
None of this is hard to check yourself. Search Console sits with the site owner, not the agency, and Google’s own page describes it as the tool to “measure your site’s Search traffic and performance” — the searches a site appears for and the clicks they produce (source: Google Search Console).
If anyone is doing search work for you, ask for access to your own property. Screenshots are not the same thing. Which numbers deserve a place in a monthly report is a bigger question, and our guide to how SEO success is measured takes it on.
Once the metric is settled, the rows still need careful reading. Two of them are not what they look like.
Why the starting point changes everything
The starting number decides what a multiple is worth. The TCM clinic’s 5× is the biggest multiple among the six-month rows here, and it is 34 visits becoming 170. The chiropractic clinic’s 1.3× is the smallest multiple in the table. It also added more actual human beings than the TCM result did.
The arithmetic is worth seeing laid out. This is the most common way a results page misleads without lying:
TCM clinic 34 → 170 5× +136 visits per month
Chiropractic 1,363 → 1,819 1.3× +456 visits per month
The bigger multiple delivered less than a third of the people. Both projects ran six months. Both numbers are real. An agency out to flatter itself would put the 5× on a slide and leave the 1.3× off the website. That is roughly what the field does.
From AuthorityLighthouse’s work across seven Singapore clinics, a low starting base is normal rather than embarrassing. A new practice genuinely does start near zero, and so does an old one that has never had a website worth crawling. Early growth there throws off huge multiples on tiny gains. Clinics that start higher post duller multiples and often win more patients. We would rather show you both than teach you to read the wrong column.
Time is the other thing doing quiet work in this table. The six-month rows and the multi-year rows are not two grades of outcome. They are the same work, photographed at different points. Google is direct that timelines vary, noting that some changes “might take effect in a few hours, others could take several months” (source: Google Search Central SEO Starter Guide). We have written that pattern up on its own rather than argue it here. See why six months and five years differ for the analysis, and how long SEO takes for the plain timeline.
Reading the table correctly still leaves what it cannot tell you.
What the record does not tell you
This record shows traffic, and traffic is not revenue. It does not show what these businesses earned, how many inquiries became customers, or what the work cost. Nine projects is a record, not a sample. It cannot promise you anything about your own business.
The honest limits are worth stating in full:
- Visits are not customers. A clinic that triples its traffic and cannot answer the phone has tripled nothing. Attribution is its own subject, covered in turning traffic into revenue.
- These are outcomes, not forecasts. Your field, your starting position, your rivals, and your budget all differ. What return is fair to plan around is a separate question, and we treat it as one in what return to expect.
- Traffic is a mid-point measure. It sits between the work and the money, so it can be shown without context. So can rankings, impressions, and keyword counts. We keep a list of metrics that look better than they are.
- Nine is nine. We have run other work that did not produce a result worth publishing. So has any agency with a decade behind it.
When we audit a site that has been through a previous agency, the missing piece is almost never traffic data. It is the link between that traffic and anything the owner cares about. Nobody set the tracking up at the start, and by month twelve it is too late to rebuild.
Publishing the awkward rows is also just how evidence is supposed to work. Google’s own guidance on helpful content asks whether a page “present[s] information in a way that makes you want to trust it, such as clear sourcing, evidence of the expertise involved” (source: Google Search Central on creating helpful content). A filtered list fails that test even when every number in it is true.
You do not have to take a page like this at face value. Google’s own guidance for businesses hiring an SEO says as much. It tells buyers to ask, “Can you show me examples of your previous work and share some success stories?” and to “Check your SEO’s business references.” It also warns that “No one can guarantee a #1 ranking on Google” (source: Google Search Central guidance on hiring an SEO).
Every project on this page can be walked through live, with the client’s own reporting on screen. That is the standard we would hold another agency to.
One row needs explaining before the table makes sense as a whole.
Why a crypto exchange sits in a Singapore SME’s proof set
Bybit is the biggest number on this page and the least relevant to most readers. It went from 20,000 to 446,000 monthly organic visits in eighteen months. That proves the work holds up at a scale almost no Singapore SME will ever reach. It does not mean crypto is a field we target. We do not.
The difference is worth being clear about.
| The big row | What it does prove | What it does not prove |
|---|---|---|
| Bybit, 20,000 to 446,000 in eighteen months | The approach survives real competition, huge page counts, and a field where search results move constantly. | Anything about a four-room dental practice in Novena, which is a different problem on a different budget. |
| Storables, 6,000 to 243,000 over two and a half years | An ecommerce story. Useful if you sell products online. | Much less useful if you sell appointments. |
A very large project is a genuine thing to know about an agency. Storables sits in the same spot for other reasons.
If you run a Singapore clinic or a small local business, the seven clinic rows are your evidence. The two big ones are context. We keep them here because dropping an awkward row would make the record less honest, not more useful. An agency that only shows you work resembling yours is showing you a filtered list.
The full detail on any of these lives one level down.
Where the detail on each project lives
Every project has its own write-up. Each one covers what the situation was, what the work involved, and how the numbers moved month by month. This page is the index. The pages below are the evidence in full.
| Client | What it shows |
|---|---|
| Nuffield Dental, 5 years | What a long dental project looks like at the far end of the curve. |
| Storables, 2.5 years | An ecommerce operation growing across thousands of product pages. |
| Bybit, 1.5 years | That the approach holds at very large scale, in a fast-moving field. |
| Plastic surgery clinic, 1 year | A specialist practice in a crowded, tightly regulated field. |
| Aesthetic clinic, 1 year | Near-zero starting base to a working stream of patient searches. |
| Chiropractic clinic, 6 months | A modest multiple that added real patient numbers. |
| Hair-loss clinic, 6 months | An early-stage project in a narrow, high-intent field. |
| Beauty salon, 6 months | A local business doubling from a small local base. |
| TCM clinic, 6 months | The smallest base on the record, and what six months does to one. |
The links to each write-up sit in the record table at the top of this page, one per row, next to the numbers they explain.
This page stops at the evidence on purpose. It does not argue that search work is a good idea for your business. That argument deserves its own page, not a paragraph bolted onto the results that would support it. If that is the question you came with, our guide to whether SEO actually works uses these same nine datasets to make the case properly.
Frequently asked questions
How do you count a “monthly organic visit”?
We take the number from the analytics account the client owns, filtered to the organic search channel. Then we compare a typical month near the start with one near the end. We do not use a peak month as the end figure, or a trough as the start. Where an account has both analytics and Search Console connected, we cross-check the two. Clicks recorded by Google and sessions recorded by analytics rarely match exactly, and a big gap between them usually means something is set up wrong.
Why are some of these clients unnamed here when they are named elsewhere?
Three clients agreed to be named in public and six did not. That is normal in healthcare. A clinic that announces hiring a marketing agency is telling rivals exactly where its patients came from, and some owners would rather not. The unnamed rows are described by field instead. The accounts behind them are real, and we can identify them to anyone who asks in a meeting. We would rather publish an unnamed row with a real number than a named logo with a percentage.
What counts as a fair starting baseline?
A month that reflects the business as it really was, not the worst month you can find. The temptation is to start the clock in a seasonal trough, or right after a site move has broken something. Both make a recovery look like growth. We use a typical month from before any work begins. If a site had just been damaged, that fact belongs in the write-up. It should not be used quietly to inflate the result.
Can any of these results be verified independently?
Partly, and the parts that matter can. Third-party tools estimate organic traffic well enough to show a trend, so the shape of any of these curves can be checked from outside. The exact figures live in accounts only the client and their agency can open. So the real check is asking to see them live, which is what Google’s guidance tells businesses to do. Ask any agency, including us, to walk through a case study with the real reporting on screen.
Are these nine typical, or the best nine?
They are every project we have permission to publish, which is why the 1.3× is here. A “best nine” would look different. It would drop the chiropractic result, drop the TCM clinic’s small numbers, and lead with the two biggest logos. A results page showing only spectacular outcomes is either a very young agency or a filtered list. The second is far more likely.
Do you have a case study in my industry?
Possibly not, and it matters less than it seems. Seven of the nine are Singapore clinics or health-adjacent practices, so a clinic owner is looking at directly comparable evidence. If you run something else, the honest answer is that the mechanics carry over better than the specifics do. The useful question on a first call is not “have you done my industry.” It is “what would you expect to be different about mine, and why.” An agency that cannot answer the second one has not thought about your business yet.
Written by the AuthorityLighthouse editorial team with AI-assisted drafting, reviewed by Sunny Tay, Editor. Updated August 2026. Primary sources include Google Search Central, Google Search Console Help, and Google Analytics Help. All client outcome figures are drawn from AuthorityLighthouse’s own engagement records. All facts independently verified against cited documentation current as of August 2026.
This article shares general guidance on search visibility for Singapore businesses, drawn from AuthorityLighthouse’s client work. Results shown are from real, named client engagements; every business starts from a different baseline, and no outcome is guaranteed. Where this article touches healthcare advertising, verify current MOH/HSA rules for your license class before publishing marketing content.
