Understanding 9Sail's Digital Visibility Index™

We analyze overall non-branded keyword growth using year-over-year percent change methodology to normalize for firm size differences. However, we acknowledge that attorney names may be included in this metric, and we recommend further analysis to isolate true service-focused, non-branded terms from attorney-specific keywords.

Core Web Vitals evaluates three key performance metrics: Largest Contentful Paint (loading), First Input Delay (interactivity), and Cumulative Layout Shift (visual stability). We score these against Google’s thresholds to determine overall site performance health.

• Largest Contentful Paint (LCP) – Loading Performance
  
  Measures how long it takes for the largest visible content element on a page to fully load and render. This is typically the main image, video, or large block of text that users see first. Good LCP scores are 2.5 seconds or faster.
• First Input Delay (FID) – Interactivity
  
  Measures the time between when a user first interacts with your page (clicks a link, taps a button, etc.) and when the browser actually responds to that interaction. It captures how responsive your site feels to users. Good FID scores are 100 milliseconds or less.
• Cumulative Layout Shift (CLS) – Visual Stability
  
  Measures how much visible content unexpectedly shifts or moves around while the page is loading. This includes elements like images loading and pushing text down, or ads appearing and causing content to jump. Good CLS scores are 0.1 or lower.

These metrics matter because they directly impact user experience – slow loading times, unresponsive interactions, and shifting content all frustrate visitors and can cause them to leave your site. Google also uses these metrics as ranking factors in search results, making them crucial for both user satisfaction and SEO performance.

We utilize a combination of publicly available SEO tools, search engine data, and website performance analysis platforms to gather comprehensive digital visibility metrics across the entire Am Law 200 list.

• Increases typically result from enhanced content creation targeting service-focused keywords and improved SEO optimization strategies. Additional causes of increases: increased authority, improved website performance.
• Declines commonly stem from Google algorithm updates affecting page rankings, though the overall impact is usually minor. Challenges in differentiating attorney-specific terms from true non-branded keywords can also skew results. Additional causes of declines: aging/unupdated content, authority loss, website errors, competitive landscape changes.

Currently, attorney names may be included in our non-branded metrics, which can impact accuracy. We recommend analyzing non-branded keyword data to separate attorney-specific terms from genuine service-focused, non-branded queries for more precise insights.

Earned media (like Wall Street Journal mentions) provides significant brand value but may not directly boost SEO through backlinks as many preeminent media outlets often do not provide backlinks from their online publications to a firm’s site. Digital PR placements that include backlinks to your firm’s website offer greater value by supporting both traditional SEO and visibility in AI-powered search results.

It is unclear at this time if paid vs. unpaid listings impact AI and generative search results. As of the time of publication, it appears paid directory listings may carry less weight in AI/generative search results compared to organic, unpaid mentions from authoritative sources. However, any third-party rankings and directories can still help improve visibility in these emerging search formats.

Third-party rankings and directories, including Chambers, generally help improve visibility in AI/generative search results. However, the specific impact difference between paid and non-paid listings in these new search formats remains unclear as the technology continues evolving.

Our year-over-year percent change methodology helps normalize potential recency bias that might favor smaller firms making recent digital investments over larger firms with established online presences.

We recommend focusing on conversion-focused tracking (such as form submissions) rather than relying solely on top-of-funnel traffic metrics that may be impacted by evolving privacy regulations and cookie restrictions.

We compare firms within similar practice areas, geographic markets, and revenue tiers to provide meaningful competitive context. Am Law 200 firms are segmented by size and specialization to ensure relevant peer comparisons.

Smaller firms often have more focused digital strategies and can implement changes more quickly than larger organizations. However, larger firms typically have advantages in brand recognition and overall digital authority that may not be captured in all metrics.

Meaningful improvements typically take 6-12 months to materialize in search rankings and visibility metrics. However, technical improvements (like Core Web Vitals) can show faster results within 30-90 days.

We combine data from leading SEO platforms, Google Search Console APIs, website performance monitoring tools, and proprietary analysis to ensure comprehensive and accurate reporting across all measured categories.

Our data reflects publicly available information and search engine metrics. Limitations include potential delays in search engine data updates, variations in tool accuracy, and the evolving nature of search algorithms affecting consistency over time.

The Annual Am Law 200 Digital Visibility Index uses data collected over a 12-month period to ensure statistical significance. Quarterly updates are available for individual firm audits to track progress between annual reports.

Some technical improvements can be handled internally, but most firms lack the specialized expertise fora comprehensive SEO strategy, content optimization, and staying current with algorithm changes that drive meaningful visibility improvements.

The legal industry generally lags 5+ years behind other professional services in digital marketing adoption, creating significant opportunities for firms that invest strategically in comprehensive digital visibility strategies.

Most large firms focus heavily on brand-based marketing and referral relationships, historically underinvesting in search optimization for service-specific queries that potential clients actually use when researching legal services.

AI-powered search is shifting emphasis toward authoritative, well-structured content that can be easily cited and referenced. Firms optimizing for traditional search alone will increasingly lose visibility as AI tools become primary research methods.

Currently, our reports don’t include AI/generative search data due to limited standardization and availability of information across platforms. We plan to incorporate this data into future iterations as it becomes more widely available and standardized across search engines and AI platforms.

We continuously adapt our methodology to reflect emerging search behaviors, including voice search, visual search, and AI-powered research tools. The index will incorporate new metrics as they become measurable and relevant to legal client acquisition.