Google Maps Leads: What 458 Rows Contain

A Google Maps lead reliably contains a business name, a category, a star rating and a phone number, usually a website, and often nothing else. Across 458 dentist listings we collected in five European cities on 3 September 2026, 99.3 percent carried a phone number, 96.5 percent a website, 99.6 percent a rating, but only 12.7 percent a review count. Here is every field, counted.

The measurement, in one paragraph

One category, five cities, one afternoon. We asked a Google Maps collector for 100 dentists each in Milan, Berlin, Madrid, Paris and London, using the local-language keyword and a proxy exit in the matching country, with no contact filter applied so that nothing was quietly dropped from the denominator. Google returned 458 rows of the 500 requested. We then drew 20 businesses with a website per city, one per distinct domain, and re-scanned them with a dedicated site-contacts pass. The per-business flags are published as a CSV: leads-study-2026-09.csv, 458 rows, no phone numbers, no email addresses, no street addresses.

Field fill rates across 458 listings

Usability, defined as a row carrying a phone number or an email address, was 99.3 percent: 455 of 458. That is the number that matters if you intend to contact the business at all, and it is high because the phone field is nearly complete even where the web presence is not.

City by city, because the averages hide Paris

Two things fall out of that table. Google decides how many rows exist: we asked for 100 per city and Berlin returned 79, London 87, Madrid 93. And Paris found an email on 19.2 percent of its listings against London's 82.8 percent, a four-fold gap between two European capitals in the same category on the same day.

The Paris finding: a website is not the practice's website

Across all five cities, 442 rows carried a website but they resolved to only 398 distinct domains. In Paris the concentration is stark: 90 website rows, 57 distinct domains, 18 of them doctolib.fr and 8 dentego.fr. A booking platform's page is a real, working URL and it satisfies any "has a website" filter, but it publishes no practice email, so a contact scan of it returns nothing. Two Madrid rows listed an Instagram profile as their website, with the same effect.

This is why a per-country email yield is not a property of the country's businesses, it is a property of the country's booking-platform market. If you are sizing an outbound programme in France, plan for phone and for the platform, not for email. The practical fix is to deduplicate by domain before you pay for enrichment: our sample took one business per distinct domain precisely so that a shared platform was not scanned eighteen times.

Ratings arrive, review counts do not

The rating field was present on 99.6 percent of rows and told us almost nothing. The mean across 458 European dentists was 4.76, the median 4.8, and the lowest observed rating 3.0. On a nominally 1-to-5 scale, the working range in this category is about 4.4 to 5.0. Sorting a lead list by rating mostly sorts noise.

The review count, which would tell you how much weight a 4.8 carries, came back on 58 rows out of 458 and on zero of the 272 rows across Milan, Berlin and Madrid. We went looking for the cause the next day, and it is not ours and not the language: Google's own response carries the count on roughly one request in ten, in every locale we tried (90 direct fetches, 4 September 2026), and the other nine carry the star rating with no number behind it. Because a page of results is one request, the counts arrive in whole blocks of twenty rows, which is exactly the shape of our Paris and London data. Plan for the field to be missing. Where a count did arrive (n=58) the mean was 355.4 and the median 259, split as Paris n=40 (mean 402.0, median 339) and London n=18 (mean 251.9, median 224.5). Those are real numbers on a small, self-selected slice, not a European average.

Website reachability, reported by the collector's own status field across all 458 rows: 415 scanned (90.6 percent), 23 unreachable (5.0 percent), 19 with no website at all (4.1 percent), 1 blocked (0.2 percent). So roughly one business in eleven cannot be contact-scanned even in principle.

What a usable lead cost

The runs were executed on an internal account and returned zero billed, so the figures below are what the same work costs at list price, not observed charges. At $0.01 per delivered lead and $0.02 per delivered site, 458 leads and 96 enriched sites come to $6.50.

The all-in figure of $0.01429 per usable lead is the honest one to quote, because it includes the enrichment pass that turns a website into an email address. Both figures assume pay-per-success billing: the shortfall between 500 rows requested and 458 delivered cost nothing. Our published rates are $0.01 per local business lead, $0.02 per site of contacts and $0.03 per company profile, listed on the pricing page, with $2 of free credit a month.

Limitations you should hold us to

• One category, one day. Dentists only, every run inside a 13-minute window on 3 September 2026. Maps results are personalised and volatile; a repeat run will not return the same set.
• Small enrichment sample. 20 sampled sites per city, 96 delivered. At n=19 to 20 a per-city email rate carries roughly ten percentage points of sampling noise; the pooled 67.7 percent across 96 sites is the defensible figure, and the per-city split ran from 89.5 percent in Madrid to 36.8 percent in Paris.
• Costs are list prices, not charges. The account used was not billed.
• Emails are published business addresses, mostly role inboxes. This study reports how often they exist, not whether contacting them is lawful where you are: that question is treated in is lead generation legal.
• Dentists are a contact-rich category. Trades and sole operators publish less. Do not carry a 96.5 percent website rate into a category you have not measured.

How to run the same measurement

Set the keyword in the local language and the proxy exit and search locale to the target country, or you will collect a different city's idea of the category. Turn any "only with contacts" filter off while measuring, or your fill rates will be one hundred percent by construction. Deduplicate by domain before enrichment. Then count usable rows, not delivered rows, and divide the spend by that. The step-by-step is in how to scrape leads from Google Maps, the email side in how to find business email addresses, and the legal boundary of the collection itself in is scraping Google Maps legal.

The two collectors used were the Google Maps scraper API for the listing pass and the site contacts collector for the enrichment pass, with a structured record of the business available separately through company data collection. The raw responses stay private; the de-identified per-business CSV is the part we publish, so anyone can check our arithmetic instead of taking the percentages on trust.