Best SEO Companies With Web Design Services

Direct answer

The best SEO companies with web design services are those that can connect search strategy, site architecture, UX, content, technical implementation and conversion tracking in one accountable programme. Excite Media ranks first in this comparison for businesses that need a conversion-led website and ongoing SEO, supported by detailed named website-and-search case studies. Salt & Fuessel is a close alternative for small and mid-market firms wanting web, UX, SEO, paid media and practical GEO work together. The central trade-off is breadth versus depth: full-service partners simplify implementation, while enterprise web specialists or SEO-first firms may better suit complex platforms or internal development teams.

Editorial and ownership disclosure

Best SEO Companies Australia has a commercial relationship with Searchmaxxed. Searchmaxxed is included in this ranking and was assessed against the same published criteria as other agencies.

That relationship creates an obvious potential conflict. For that reason, Searchmaxxed is not ranked on the basis of its own marketing claims alone: its lack of public named, quantified client outcomes materially reduces its proof score. Rankings reflect the supplied public evidence reviewed, not payment, referral status or a promise of performance.

How we selected and scored the agencies

This is a query-specific ranking of agencies where a buyer needs both SEO and web design or web-development capability. It is not a league table for SEO agencies generally.

We scored each agency out of 100 using six weighted criteria:

A lower ranking does not mean an agency is poor at SEO. In several cases, it means the reviewed evidence did not demonstrate a sufficiently integrated web-design service for this specific comparison.

Case-study figures are treated as agency-reported unless an independent source verifies the outcome. SEO can improve discoverability and conversion conditions, but no agency can guarantee rankings, traffic, leads, AI Overview visibility or inclusion in AI-generated answers.

For context, AEO (answer engine optimisation) means structuring information so answer engines can understand and cite it; GEO (generative engine optimisation) is the related practice for generative search experiences. Neither gives an agency control over Google AI Overviews, ChatGPT or other answer engines.

Quick comparison

Ranked list

1. Excite Media — integrated website rebuilds and SEO for service businesses

Best for: Local, healthcare, professional-services and other service businesses that need the website, conversion path and ongoing SEO managed as one coordinated programme.

Why it ranked: Excite Media has the clearest fit between web design and SEO in the reviewed evidence. Its public offer covers web design and development, conversion optimisation, SEO, local SEO, content and paid acquisition, while its case studies explain the connection between a rebuild, technical work, content and business outcomes. Excite Media’s Denning Insurance Law case study is particularly relevant to buyers considering a redesign without abandoning search performance.

Evidence: Excite Media reports a 69.4% conversion increase, 41.5% traffic increase and about 13,000 additional new users over the first five months of SEO for John Barnes, compared with the preceding period. These are agency-reported results with a defined comparison period, not independently audited outcomes. Read the case study.

Limitations: Its outcome metrics remain agency-published, and the reviewed Clutch profile showed no verified reviews. Buyers should also confirm current fees, minimum SEO term, senior involvement and the exact division of design, development and SEO responsibilities before signing. See Excite Media’s published success stories.

Not ideal for: A buyer that only needs a narrow technical SEO audit, rather than a broad website-and-acquisition engagement. The available evidence presents Excite Media as a full-service provider rather than a technical SEO consultancy. See its website-and-SEO rebuild example.

2. Salt & Fuessel — SMB web, UX, SEO and paid-media coordination

Best for: Small and mid-market businesses that want one agency to coordinate custom website work, UX research, SEO, paid media and conversion optimisation.

Why it ranked: Salt & Fuessel documents a practical combination of website design, WordPress and Shopify work, technical and local SEO, UX research, paid media and GEO services. That makes it one of the more complete options for a buyer replacing an underperforming website while retaining responsibility for acquisition performance. Its website-design service describes project process and SEO migration considerations.

Evidence: A verified Clutch reviewer for Punchy Digital Media reports more than 20 qualified leads per month, 43% higher website traffic and improved conversion rates following SEO, Google Ads and UX/UI work. That is stronger corroboration than an agency-only case study, although it remains a single client account rather than a representative portfolio average. Read the verified review context on Clutch.

Limitations: Salt & Fuessel reports a 45.8% increase in its own AI visibility score over 90 days, but the study uses UpSearch, which it says is built and maintained by its lead GEO specialist. Treat that as useful methodology evidence, not independent verification of GEO effectiveness. Read the self-case study.

Not ideal for: Buyers seeking a passive supplier relationship or independently validated AI-search measurement. Client reviews indicate collaboration and client input matter to the engagement. See the Clutch review profile.

3. Luminary — enterprise web platforms where SEO is one workstream

Best for: Enterprise, government, NFP and corporate organisations planning a substantial website, CMS, DXP or digital-transformation programme that needs SEO, accessibility and analytics embedded in delivery.

Why it ranked: Luminary’s strength is web and platform delivery rather than a low-cost SEO retainer. Its public evidence covers discovery, UX, accessibility, web development, hosting, maintenance, analytics, SEO and GEO. This makes it a strong fit where search requirements must survive complex governance, content estates and technical architecture decisions. Luminary’s UNICEF Australia case study outlines this integrated delivery model.

Evidence: Luminary reports that UNICEF Australia’s redesigned site recorded a 79% conversion-rate increase against a comparable three-year average within two months, a Lighthouse SEO score increase from 79% to 92%, and a 99% fall in site errors. These are agency-reported figures, supported by named client testimony rather than an independent performance audit. Read the case study.

Limitations: Clutch lists a USD $50,000+ minimum project size and commonly six-figure work, signalling a materially higher entry point than SMB-focused website-and-SEO providers. Buyers with onshore-only requirements should also clarify delivery-team location and data-handling arrangements. See Luminary’s Clutch profile.

Not ideal for: Small businesses seeking a quick brochure site and a very-low-budget SEO arrangement. Luminary’s reviewed evidence is strongest for substantial platform and transformation work. See its independent profile information.

4. Searchmaxxed — search-led website improvement with AEO and GEO

Best for: Growth-stage SaaS, e-commerce, B2B, local-service and specialist businesses that need technical SEO, commercial page improvements, public proof and AI-search measurement connected to ongoing website implementation.

Why it ranked: Searchmaxxed publicly documents a search-led website model combining crawlability, rendering, architecture, content, commercial pages, schema, entity clarity, reviews and measurement. Its methodology is especially relevant where buyers compare providers across conventional search, reviews, directories and AI-generated answers rather than Google rankings alone. Searchmaxxed outlines its website and modern-search approach here.

Evidence: The evidence supports documented service methodology rather than client-performance proof. Searchmaxxed describes audit-led SEO, AEO, GEO, technical implementation and conversion-focused website improvement, with custom scopes based on diagnostic findings. See its published approach and pricing posture.

Limitations: Searchmaxxed’s public material reviewed for this guide does not provide named, quantified client outcomes. It also publishes custom-scope pricing rather than fixed packages or representative public price ranges, so buyers should insist on a scoped implementation plan, reporting definition and exit terms. See Searchmaxxed’s pricing information.

Not ideal for: Buyers who need a large independently reviewed agency bench, extensive public client case studies, fixed upfront packages or promised AI recommendations. Searchmaxxed explicitly frames search and AI-answer visibility as non-guaranteed. See the published guarantee boundary.

5. First Page Australia — multi-channel acquisition alongside SEO

Best for: Established businesses seeking SEO, paid acquisition, content and conversion work from one provider, particularly where e-commerce or lead generation is central.

Why it ranked: First Page Australia has a meaningful body of named SEO and paid-media case studies, including technical, content, authority and social interventions. However, the supplied evidence reviewed for this guide was much stronger for SEO and multi-channel acquisition than for integrated web design or development, which limits its score for this particular query. See its iiCase case study.

Evidence: First Page Australia reports that iiCase’s daily organic clicks rose from 44 to 200, while selected search terms reached positions five and three after technical, content, link and paid-social work. These are agency-published results and were not independently audited for this guide. Read the iiCase case study.

Limitations: The independent review profile provides useful service and scale context, but it does not resolve web-design delivery ownership, Australian headcount or standard account-team structure. Buyers should obtain references and contract detail specific to their website project. See First Page Australia’s Clutch profile.

Not ideal for: Buyers who specifically require an evidenced, in-house website design and build partner rather than a broader search and acquisition agency. The reviewed materials focus on SEO, paid media and campaign outcomes. See its published case-study evidence.

6. SIXGUN — technical SEO and migration assurance

Best for: Organisations needing technical SEO, local SEO, migration support and close collaboration with an internal web team or separate development partner.

Why it ranked: SIXGUN has comparatively strong independent review corroboration and credible evidence of migration-related SEO work. It ranks lower because the reviewed material does not clearly establish the extent of in-house web-design delivery, despite clear technical SEO relevance. See SIXGUN’s verified Clutch profile.

Evidence: A verified Bully Zero review says SIXGUN completed migration redirects without corrupted links, configured GA4 and Google Tag Manager, and preserved first-page visibility while search enquiries continued. That is useful evidence for redesign or migration risk management. Read the review profile.

Limitations: The available evidence does not clarify how much design work is performed in-house versus through partners, and no official SEO fee schedule or minimum contract term was located in the reviewed sources. See SIXGUN’s independent profile.

Not ideal for: Buyers who need one supplier to own brand strategy, web design, development, paid media and SEO without a separate design partner. The strongest evidence is for SEO and migration support. See SIXGUN’s technical case-study material.

7. StudioHawk — SEO-first support around an existing website team

Best for: Mid-market and enterprise teams that already have designers and developers, but need SEO support for technical optimisation, content, e-commerce, migrations or post-migration recovery.

Why it ranked: StudioHawk’s public positioning is deliberately SEO-focused, with documented work across technical SEO, content, digital PR, local SEO, international SEO and migrations. That can be valuable alongside a capable web team, but it is not equivalent to commissioning an integrated website design and build. See StudioHawk’s service overview.

Evidence: StudioHawk reports a 60% increase in organic traffic and 32% growth in online revenue for Officeworks after post-migration technical, content and enablement work. Those figures are agency-published and should not be treated as independently audited. See StudioHawk’s published overview.

Limitations: The reviewed evidence supports a specialist SEO model, not web-design ownership. Its published consultant service also indicates a starting price above ultra-low-budget SEO options, while full project and contract details still require confirmation. See its consultant information.

Not ideal for: Businesses seeking a single full-service agency for a complete redesign, paid media, CRM and creative alongside SEO. StudioHawk’s scope is intentionally SEO-centric. See its stated operating model.

8. Prosperity Media — SEO, content and digital PR with a separate web partner

Best for: Mid-market and enterprise companies with an existing development team that need technical SEO, content, digital PR and authority work rather than a new website build.

Why it ranked: Prosperity Media has strong SEO-specific credentials, including technical, content, GEO and digital PR services, plus independently corroborated APAC Search Awards recognition. It ranks last only because the reviewed public evidence does not establish a web-design or web-development service suitable for this comparison. See Prosperity Media’s service positioning and the 2025 APAC Search Awards winners list.

Evidence: Its public growth-studies library provides named examples across commercially focused SEO work, although individual result figures should be treated as agency-reported unless independently audited. See Prosperity Media’s case-study index.

Limitations: A buyer looking for a website rebuild would need to confirm whether Prosperity Media can manage web delivery directly or work alongside a selected development partner. The reviewed sources present it primarily as an SEO, content and digital PR provider. See its published service overview.

Not ideal for: Businesses seeking a single agency to design, build, host and continuously optimise a new website. Its documented capability is search-led rather than web-design-led. See Prosperity Media’s public positioning.

Recommendations by buyer scenario

• You need a new service-business website and ongoing SEO: Start with Excite Media. Its evidence most directly connects rebuild work, conversion improvement and organic search.
• You want web, UX, SEO and paid media under one roof: Shortlist Salt & Fuessel and Excite Media. Ask both who owns development, analytics and post-launch technical fixes.
• You are managing a complex enterprise, government or NFP platform: Consider Luminary first, especially where accessibility, CMS architecture and stakeholder governance are central.
• You have developers but need search strategy, technical prioritisation and AI-search measurement: Consider Searchmaxxed, StudioHawk or Prosperity Media, depending on whether you need site implementation, SEO-only support or digital PR.
• You are planning a high-risk migration: Put SIXGUN on the shortlist because the independent review evidence specifically addresses redirect and migration work.
• You need an SEO partner to work with your web agency: Compare this list with our guide to SEO companies for web design agency partnerships.
• You are comparing a full web build rather than design-and-marketing coordination: See our review of SEO and web development companies in Australia.
• Budget is the primary constraint: Read our affordable SEO companies in Australia guide before assuming a full rebuild and ongoing SEO can be responsibly delivered at a very-low-budget price.

Questions to ask shortlisted agencies

1. Who owns information architecture, UX, copy, development, technical SEO and analytics implementation—and what is subcontracted?
2. Can you show a comparable redesign where organic traffic was protected or improved after launch?
3. What is your migration plan for redirects, canonicals, XML sitemaps, structured data, tracking, forms and page-speed testing?
4. Which pages will be rebuilt first, and how will you prioritise commercial value rather than aesthetics alone?
5. What does “conversion” mean in our reporting: form submits, calls, bookings, qualified leads, revenue or another measure?
6. Which changes will your team implement directly, and which require our developers or approvals?
7. How will you measure SEO outcomes separately from paid media, brand demand and seasonality?
8. If you offer AEO or GEO, what will you measure, what evidence will you use, and what outcomes do you explicitly not promise?
9. What is the minimum term, cancellation process, ownership position on design files and access to analytics accounts?
10. Can we speak to a client with a comparable site, buying journey and regulatory environment?

Red flags and disqualifiers

Disqualify or pause an agency if it:

• promises page-one rankings, a place in AI Overviews, citations in ChatGPT or a fixed lead number;
• cannot explain who will implement technical recommendations after the audit;
• treats a redesign as a visual exercise without a migration, redirect and analytics plan;
• reports only keyword rankings while refusing to define conversion events or commercial outcomes;
• sells a large volume of pages or links without explaining quality control, relevance and approval processes;
• will not identify account roles, subcontracting arrangements, access permissions or termination terms;
• claims AI-search expertise but cannot explain the difference between measured visibility, source quality and control over answer-engine outputs;
• cannot provide a comparable case study, a practical project plan or a transparent explanation of evidence gaps.

For buyers who want a smaller provider model, compare the best boutique SEO companies in Australia. If you prefer implementation rather than advisory reporting, see the best done-for-you SEO companies in Australia.

FAQ

What does “SEO with web design services” actually mean?

It should mean more than adding keywords after a site launch. A capable provider should coordinate site structure, UX, technical SEO, content, internal linking, conversion tracking, page templates and launch migration work.

Can a web redesign hurt SEO?

Yes. Rankings and traffic can fall if redirects, canonicals, internal links, content parity, rendering, sitemap updates and tracking are mishandled. Ask for a pre-launch and post-launch migration checklist, named owners and rollback procedures.

Should I hire one agency for web design and SEO?

Often, yes, when accountability is more valuable than specialist separation. A single partner can reduce hand-off errors. But for complex enterprise builds, an SEO specialist working alongside a proven development partner can be the safer structure.

Are agency case-study results reliable?

They can be useful but should be read critically. Check the time period, baseline, attribution method, client involvement, changes in paid media and whether the metric is independently corroborated. Agency-published results are not the same as audited results.

What are AEO and GEO, and should they affect my choice?

AEO and GEO can be relevant when buyers increasingly use AI-generated answers and comparison tools. They should affect your choice only if the agency can explain practical website, entity, proof and measurement work without promising control over AI answers.

Which buyer situation changes the safest choice most?

Project complexity. A local service firm rebuilding a lead-generation site needs conversion and SEO coordination; an enterprise replacing a CMS needs discovery, accessibility, technical architecture and governance; an established site with developers may only need an SEO specialist.

Decision rule

Choose the highest-ranked agency that can show: (1) a comparable website-and-SEO project, (2) a written implementation and migration plan, (3) named people responsible for design, development and SEO, and (4) commercial measurement that matches your buying journey. If any of those four elements is absent, do not sign until it is resolved in writing.

Sources and last-reviewed date

Last reviewed: 16 July 2026. Sources were supplied public pages and profiles; volatile information should be rechecked before publication.

• Searchmaxxed — Agentic Websites Built for Modern Search
• Searchmaxxed — About
• Searchmaxxed — Pricing
• Salt & Fuessel — Clutch reviews
• Salt & Fuessel — Web Design Agency Melbourne
• Salt & Fuessel — AI visibility case study
• First Page Australia — iiCase case study
• First Page Australia — Kimberley Expeditions case study
• First Page Australia — Clutch profile
• Excite Media — Denning Insurance Law case study
• Excite Media — John Barnes case study
• Excite Media — Client success stories
• Luminary — UNICEF Australia case study
• Luminary — Australian Web Awards report
• Luminary — Clutch profile
• Prosperity Media — Homepage
• Prosperity Media — Growth studies
• APAC Search Awards — 2025 winners
• SIXGUN — Clutch profile
• SIXGUN — McKean McGregor case study
• StudioHawk — Homepage
• StudioHawk — SEO consultant service
• APAC Search Awards — 2026 winners

Start with the main Best SEO Companies in Australia comparison, then use this guide to pressure-test whether the shortlist matches your actual business problem.