Online Legal Directory Profiles’ Impact on Search Visibility
Last Updated on June 16, 2025
The shift toward digital information has changed how legal professionals attract clients and build visibility, and online legal directories have been a key part of this transformation. While the qualitative benefits of directory profiles are recognized, their quantitative impact on search visibility is less understood. This study addresses that gap, analyzing data from 177 law firms to assess how a presence in FindLaw’s online legal directories affects search engine discoverability. Over 200 hours of manual data collection informed this evaluation.
Correlations Between Legal Directories Inclusion and Search Performance
Method
Our study examined the search visibility performance of online legal directories by analyzing 177 law firms operating within a competitive legal practice area and geographic region. We began by collecting both local and organic search ranking positions for each firm based on practice area + geo + attorney/lawyer queries that surfaced the firms in Google’s SERPs. Next, we identified all attorneys affiliated with each firm—921 in total—and manually determined their relevant practice areas. For each firm and attorney, we identified whether they had a corresponding profile in one or more directories—such as those on FindLaw.com, SuperLawyers.com, LawInfo.com, and Abogado.com—we confirmed these directory presences through a combination of internal directory searches and Google queries. We documented which specific directories each firm and its attorneys were associated with. All data was compiled into a structured spreadsheet for analysis.
Data Analysis
We then performed an initial round of exploratory data analysis (EDA), which surfaced important inconsistencies—such as attorney profiles listed under the wrong firm, attorneys appearing in directories but not on their firm’s official website, and vice versa. These findings prompted a second round of data collection to address gaps and ensure accuracy. This iterative process allowed us to build one of the most comprehensive and detailed datasets to date on the relationship between legal directory presence and search visibility performance.
To understand how directory participation relates to search visibility, we compared each law firm’s average local pack ranking (Google’s map-based listings) and organic search ranking (standard search results) for relevant legal queries. These combined rankings served as our benchmark for search visibility. In Graph 1, we plotted these visibility scores against the number of distinct FindLaw-owned legal directories each firm appeared in—including FindLaw.com, SuperLawyers.com, LawInfo.com, and Abogado.com. In Graphs 2 and 3, we compared search visibility with the number of attorney profiles a firm had specifically on FindLaw.com and SuperLawyers.com, respectively.
Results
The analysis revealed a modest positive relationship between higher search rankings and a greater number of attorney profiles per firm on both FindLaw.com and SuperLawyers.com directories. However, the strongest correlation was observed between search visibility and the total number of unique FindLaw directories a firm participated in. This suggests that broader directory presence—across multiple trusted platforms—may contribute more significantly to improved search performance than attorney volume on any single directory.
Observations
Our observations in this study highlighted the importance of maintaining consistent and accurate information across online legal directories and firm websites. We found that firms with numerous inclusions in directories but lower combined local and organic rankings often faced issues such as poor review ratings across various platforms and inconsistencies in the firm's name and attorney listings. One notable case involved a firm with dozens of active attorneys where discrepancies existed between the attorneys listed on their website and those in the FindLaw Directory. Such discrepancies cause algorithmic confusion at scale which often impacts search visibility, as search engines may struggle to accurately represent the firm's expertise and active attorneys. Therefore, it is crucial not only to have comprehensive online legal directory profiles but also to ensure that this information is consistently updated and aligned across all platforms, avoiding confusion and enhancing search performance.
Study Conclusion
For the 177-firm sample, creating attorney profiles within a single online legal directory remains an important step toward improving search visibility. However, the data also suggests that firms with a broader presence across multiple online legal directories tend to see moderately higher local and organic Google rankings. However, directory data quality and reputation consistency are critical moderators: Inaccuracies and low review ratings can negate the visibility gains.
While this study provided valuable insights, it also raised additional questions that warrant further investigation. We plan to continue exploring the impact of legal online directory profiles on search visibility to deepen our understanding of this dynamic. Some of the key questions we aim to address in future research include:
Does the quality and completeness of a legal directory profile (e.g., bio length, reviews, photos, videos, awards) affect its contribution to search visibility?
How does directory profile recency (i.e., how recently it was updated) influence its ranking impact?
Does practice area alignment between the directory listing and the firm's website content affect performance?
Can discrepancies—such as attorneys listed in directories but not on firm websites—harm trust signals or search rankings?
As new findings emerge, we will update this publication in the coming months to reflect the latest developments in our research.
About the Author: Daniel James Stoker is a member of the Internet Brands Performance Team and holds degrees of B.S. in Physics, B.S.H.S. in Physiological Sciences, a M.S. in Computer Sciences Database Technologies, and has completed a PGP in Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning: Business Applications.