100+ Brands Featured
Market change YoY
Biggest % grower
Biggest visit loss
Our reports have been the UK’s No.1 search marketing benchmark for the last 10 years! Marketing decision makers spanning 60 sectors have downloaded our reports to save over 72 hours of research and discover exactly how their brand ranks against the competition in search, visibility, and growth potential.
I was extremely impressed with the insight and depth of analysis in the Salience Report... The data-driven analysis tracking visibility, authority, links, page speed, search volume, keywords, and more paints a detailed picture of brand performance and emerging trends. The team was delighted to be featured.
The UK's No.1 Home Furnishings Industry Report
Between April 2025 and April 2026, the UK home furnishings market fell -1.00% in aggregate organic search visibility across 249 tracked brands. That’s the headline. Move past it quickly, because the composition tells you something the average hides.
The top 5 brands by visibility lost a combined ~990,212 monthly visits in the same window. That’s a -3.0% drop, three times the market headline. The market isn’t decaying. It’s de-concentrating, and the audience is migrating to brands the incumbents have never sat across the table from.
There’s a reason for that. Branded search demand and organic search visibility have come uncoupled. People are still typing “Dunelm” and “DFS” and “Wayfair” into Google. They’re just leaving the SERP with somebody else’s product.
| Brand | YoY Visibility | Vs -1% Market |
|---|---|---|
| Dunelm | -13.62% | -12.62% |
| DFS | -12.83% | -11.83% |
| Wayfair | -9.94% | -8.94% |
| White Company | -4.38% | -3.38% |
| Next | -2.88% | -1.88% |
Six of the top eight UK home furnishings brands by branded search demand lost organic visibility year on year. Next at -2.88%. Dunelm at -13.62%. Wayfair at -9.94%. DFS at -12.83%. La Redoute at -14.52%. The White Company at -4.38%. Only Ikea (+5.49%) and Habitat (+39.45%) bucked the trend.
The hidden number is Next. The headline reads -2.88%. The absolute reads -455,718 monthly visits, the second-largest decline in the entire 249-brand dataset. A percentage in a boardroom slide reads like a temperature. An absolute number reads like a P&L line. They are not the same thing, and the brands losing the most ground are the ones the percentage is currently letting off the hook.
| Brand | YoY Visibility | Vs -1% Market |
|---|---|---|
| Habitat | +39.45% | +40.45% |
| Ikea | +5.49% | +6.49% |
| Next | -2.88% | -1.88% |
| White Company | -4.38% | -3.38% |
| Wayfair | -9.94% | -8.94% |
| DFS | -12.83% | -11.83% |
| Dunelm | -13.62% | -12.62% |
| La Redoute | -14.52% | -13.52% |
The fastest percentage growers in this dataset all have negligible brand search demand. They are not winning because they have a brand. They are winning because they show up where the brand-led brands used to.
Furniturebox sits on 8,100 monthly brand searches and grew +119.68% YoY. Harbour Lifestyle at 3,600 brand searches grew +122.35%. Homary at 9,900 grew +120.32%. Barker & Stonehouse at 2,900 grew +61.03%. Rowen & Wren at ~3,000 grew +83.67%. Arlo & Jacob at ~10,000 grew +93.65%.
Brand awareness is no longer the input. It’s the output of being visible against the queries that matter. The growth is coming from non-branded demand: “leather corner sofa”, “outdoor garden furniture”, “linen bedding UK”. Queries the heritage brands used to own by default, and don’t anymore.
| Brand | Brand Searches/mo | YoY Growth | Vs -1% Market |
|---|---|---|---|
| Harbour Lifestyle | 3,600 | +122.35% | +123.35% |
| Homary | 9,900 | +120.32% | +121.32% |
| Furniturebox | 8,100 | +119.68% | +120.68% |
| Arlo & Jacob | ~10,000 | +93.65% | +94.65% |
| Rowen & Wren | ~3,000 | +83.67% | +84.67% |
| Barker & Stonehouse | 2,900 | +61.03% | +62.03% |
There’s an organisational truth underneath this data. Nobody gets fired for spending on brand. Nobody gets promoted for shifting budget into “Furniturebox-style” topical visibility, because if it doesn’t work, the marketing director has to explain to the board why they pulled spend off the heritage brand to chase rankings on “leather corner sofa”. If it does work, the heritage brand still gets the credit anyway.
So the spend stays where the credit lives. Brand campaigns. Brand-tracker upticks. Sponsorship recall scores. Meanwhile, the queries that actually drive organic traffic are quietly being lost to brands the marketing team has never met.
DFS holds 633,930 reviews at 4.9 stars, the largest review moat in the entire 249-brand index, and still shed visibility -12.83% YoY. SCS, half a million reviews deep, dropped -28.91%. Furniturebox, with 9,788 reviews at the same 4.9 rating, grew +119.68%. Reviews protect the moment of purchase, not the moment of search.
| Brand | Reviews | Rating | YoY Visibility |
|---|---|---|---|
| DFS | 633,930 | 4.9 | -12.83% |
| SCS | 524,730 | 4.4 | -28.91% |
| Furniturebox | 9,788 | 4.9 | +119.68% |
If brand search demand is your moat, you’re measuring the wrong moat.
Still scrolling? Here's the full 69-page report.
Download the free reportDigital performance reports covering 60+ industries within retail, finance and B2B.
