Findlaw Market Research
15 KPIs for Every City & State Delivered Monthly

Explain & Improve findlaw.com's Search Traffic By Comparing To All 94,908 Law Firms In USA

Who Is This For
Just a Few Benefits

Findlaw Managers
Founders, Partners, Business Development & Marketing Directors
Findlaw Personnel
Business Analysts, Digital Marketing Experts, SEO Experts, etc.
Other Parties
Journalists, Salesmen, Investors, Service Providers, etc.

Get a snapshot of your online presence
Compare with competitors & track month-to-month movements
Get a full picture of your competition
National or regional (state/county) & local (city/neighborhood)
Enter new markets
Or merge with/acquire another business

Real-World Findlaw Report, December 2025 (1% Sample of All Data)

Google search results collected from every zip-code in America. Reported at neighborhood, city, county, state, and national levels.

National Overview
City Overview
California
Brooklyn
National
Competitors
Local
Competitors
RAW Rankings

National Overview

State	Competition			Business Intelligence Metrics			RAW Data (Google Search Results across all ZIPs)
State	Websites	Competitors	Findlaw Rank	Visibility	Reach	Average Position	Cities	ZIPs	Pages	Rankings	Top 1	Top 3	Top 10
USA	237,358	94,908	1	43.1%	139,245,543	7.8	27,131	32,403	40,857	52,352	4,637	12,463	45,948
California	37,138	20,278	1	47.3%	18,517,467	6.4	1,161	1,735	2,031	2,721	202	528	2,463
New York	43,533	23,174	1	51.6%	10,126,680	5.9	1,488	1,753	2,611	2,921	177	504	2,737
Texas	46,336	25,988	1	34.7%	9,670,346	8.4	1,346	1,903	2,324	2,933	268	708	2,508
Florida	17,070	10,062	1	37.6%	7,749,040	7.4	446	975	731	1,333	56	172	1,114
Illinois	44,040	25,202	1	49.8%	6,387,554	9.2	1,228	1,363	2,011	2,167	137	391	1,920
Pennsylvania	44,738	23,015	1	41.7%	5,333,953	7.1	1,593	1,770	2,792	3,039	233	645	2,728
Ohio	35,887	20,412	1	43.5%	5,062,958	8.5	963	1,175	1,604	1,831	119	329	1,641
New Jersey	18,232	10,663	1	50.6%	4,495,512	6.7	536	591	908	984	30	110	917
Michigan	31,389	17,878	1	45.0%	4,476,335	7.3	824	967	1,415	1,577	126	381	1,419
Massachusetts	18,076	10,764	1	56.8%	3,877,176	5.9	460	533	788	873	49	143	832
Virginia	26,534	14,300	1	45.4%	3,816,683	6.0	721	889	1,253	1,444	147	357	1,337
North Carolina	25,109	14,007	1	36.4%	3,700,300	7.2	680	799	1,179	1,317	96	278	1,143
Washington	17,765	9,523	1	46.9%	3,411,040	5.9	448	584	777	921	87	226	852
Georgia	23,404	14,024	1	32.8%	3,381,029	7.9	574	726	980	1,179	67	201	926
Arizona	10,437	5,290	1	45.7%	3,176,622	9.2	247	396	434	591	72	175	520
Indiana	27,391	15,673	1	44.6%	2,957,902	7.8	653	764	1,095	1,238	92	275	1,080
Maryland	15,566	8,754	1	47.9%	2,875,449	6.7	389	460	687	767	56	158	710
Wisconsin	25,788	13,948	1	48.7%	2,811,006	6.6	691	766	1,192	1,274	129	351	1,162
Missouri	34,619	19,917	1	44.8%	2,730,214	8.7	878	1,008	1,439	1,581	144	395	1,306
Tennessee	21,175	11,780	1	38.9%	2,582,904	7.7	511	619	887	1,002	81	224	859
Colorado	17,295	9,611	1	46.2%	2,552,709	6.5	378	511	659	824	83	210	753
Minnesota	29,447	16,206	1	38.7%	2,136,390	9.8	762	863	1,252	1,367	142	360	1,138
Oklahoma	22,733	12,680	1	53.9%	2,111,689	8.3	549	638	916	1,008	105	286	886
Oregon	16,100	8,938	1	48.7%	1,989,689	6.4	353	412	617	682	77	207	619
Kentucky	27,043	14,720	1	44.0%	1,955,047	6.9	691	749	1,201	1,264	144	382	1,172
Alabama	21,093	11,900	1	38.3%	1,860,983	7.7	518	633	898	1,036	85	238	879
Louisiana	16,471	8,927	1	38.7%	1,806,470	7.7	426	505	751	846	87	234	719
South Carolina	14,837	8,566	1	31.4%	1,555,191	10.2	346	421	581	668	52	133	518
Connecticut	9,989	6,057	1	40.3%	1,441,605	6.5	234	279	397	459	7	37	407
Mississippi	16,909	9,544	1	45.3%	1,355,137	7.6	381	415	663	704	70	175	614
Nevada	4,780	2,342	3	43.1%	1,260,175	6.8	92	168	166	260	25	60	248
Iowa	34,688	19,551	1	37.6%	1,178,786	10.8	867	910	1,386	1,440	115	339	1,163
Arkansas	23,527	13,297	1	39.3%	1,175,591	10.3	544	578	898	944	103	291	787
Utah	11,864	6,499	2	37.4%	1,139,592	8.3	243	281	411	456	54	128	376
Kansas	26,455	15,002	1	34.3%	997,602	10.4	605	681	963	1,076	82	245	835
West Virginia	25,764	14,016	1	47.2%	863,134	7.7	677	697	1,198	1,224	179	426	1,110
New Mexico	13,517	6,935	1	35.4%	739,523	5.1	327	361	578	617	118	268	563
Hawaii	2,194	668	1	51.8%	736,605	6.5	82	93	155	168	21	48	155
New Hampshire	11,677	6,860	1	51.0%	685,139	5.1	238	248	422	438	38	97	405
Maine	17,652	9,748	1	49.8%	663,928	5.6	419	423	746	753	90	232	711
Idaho	12,109	6,608	2	36.5%	615,821	8.0	249	271	405	426	49	131	373
Nebraska	24,369	14,635	2	29.6%	564,029	11.2	517	574	784	862	63	180	653
Delaware	2,909	1,781	1	48.7%	462,865	6.6	52	66	94	108	7	20	93
Rhode Island	3,455	2,145	3	41.4%	437,038	7.3	64	77	103	118	2	10	97
Montana	16,174	8,912	1	33.0%	343,504	6.2	347	360	602	617	126	299	546
South Dakota	17,209	9,559	1	37.8%	326,968	8.9	354	365	580	600	81	226	504
Alaska	7,400	3,187	1	44.0%	324,885	11.0	207	224	346	370	101	214	333
Vermont	11,139	6,491	1	46.9%	293,223	6.2	249	253	431	439	42	115	389
Wyoming	8,349	4,378	1	37.5%	218,183	8.9	161	168	262	270	46	114	223
North Dakota	16,604	8,587	2	28.3%	212,493	10.3	360	374	564	586	75	207	482

City Overview

City	State	Competition	Business Intelligence Metrics	RAW Data (Google Search Results across all ZIPs)
Brooklyn	New York	121	104	2	75.2%	1,955,315	3.4	37	1	37	7	7	37
Chicago	Illinois	107	80	7	44.0%	1,189,293	6.6	56	1	56	0	0	56
Bronx	New York	105	91	1	73.0%	1,052,923	3.8	25	1	25	2	2	25
Houston	Texas	138	124	5	32.4%	1,031,332	7.8	96	1	96	0	0	96
Los Angeles	California	126	102	7	35.9%	883,208	7.3	62	1	62	0	0	62
Denver	Colorado	111	95	4	61.2%	664,781	4.9	38	1	38	0	4	38
Las Vegas	Nevada	106	90	5	42.2%	652,176	6.8	43	1	43	0	0	43
Tucson	Arizona	107	85	3	63.9%	578,422	4.7	32	1	32	0	4	32
San Jose	California	108	96	3	53.4%	560,802	5.5	28	1	28	0	2	28
New York City	New York	140	115	6	31.8%	516,060	7.6	47	1	47	0	0	47
Saint Louis	Missouri	156	129	5	50.3%	461,632	8.0	45	2	45	0	3	43
Milwaukee	Wisconsin	107	91	5	55.5%	450,467	5.5	29	1	29	0	5	29
Fort Lauderdale	Florida	104	94	4	53.6%	445,350	5.6	27	1	27	0	4	27
Oklahoma City	Oklahoma	109	87	3	61.7%	420,962	4.7	43	1	43	0	5	43
Mesa	Arizona	103	93	2	76.8%	410,426	3.5	13	1	13	2	2	13
Columbus	Ohio	117	100	4	48.0%	406,417	6.2	30	1	30	0	0	30
San Antonio	Texas	112	102	8	22.7%	403,326	8.7	59	1	59	0	0	59
Portland	Oregon	117	88	6	42.5%	391,307	6.7	33	1	33	0	0	33
Saint Paul	Minnesota	110	85	6	47.0%	375,611	6.4	30	2	37	0	1	37
Indianapolis	Indiana	112	92	6	37.5%	357,135	7.2	37	1	37	0	0	37
Hialeah	Florida	113	67	1	75.4%	276,777	3.6	7	2	13	1	1	13
Spring	Texas	114	100	1	72.0%	274,439	3.6	8	2	9	1	1	9
Stockton	California	106	83	2	73.0%	272,706	3.8	12	1	12	2	2	12
Anaheim	California	109	84	1	73.2%	269,954	3.6	7	2	14	1	2	14
Detroit	Michigan	104	76	6	41.4%	265,165	6.9	25	1	25	0	0	25
Oakland	California	115	97	4	63.7%	262,466	4.6	14	1	14	0	2	14
Miami	Florida	116	98	9	13.6%	256,067	9.6	55	1	55	0	0	55
Hollywood	Florida	106	93	4	54.6%	255,895	5.7	9	1	9	0	1	9
Staten Island	New York	108	82	3	52.6%	249,370	5.8	12	1	12	0	1	12
Louisville	Kentucky	113	97	7	32.7%	248,520	7.7	32	1	32	0	0	32
Colorado Springs	Colorado	105	91	6	42.1%	245,371	6.8	30	1	30	0	0	30
El Paso	Texas	103	83	5	30.8%	242,890	8.3	24	1	24	0	0	24
Long Beach	California	103	86	5	50.0%	239,485	6.0	12	1	12	0	0	12
Pompano Beach	Florida	111	86	3	64.3%	238,356	4.4	10	1	10	0	2	10
Kissimmee	Florida	106	77	1	81.8%	236,361	2.9	7	1	7	3	3	7
Vancouver	Washington	109	66	2	69.6%	226,975	4.1	11	1	11	0	0	11
Alexandria	Virginia	107	87	4	62.9%	223,006	4.8	14	1	14	0	1	14
Jacksonville	Florida	110	91	8	24.6%	213,066	8.5	31	1	31	0	0	30
Santa Ana	California	104	85	3	58.7%	209,600	5.2	6	1	6	0	0	6
Philadelphia	Pennsylvania	126	108	11	13.2%	208,440	9.7	47	1	47	0	0	43
Glendale	Arizona	110	94	1	67.8%	206,715	4.1	9	1	9	0	0	9
Chandler	Arizona	101	78	2	74.3%	199,696	3.5	6	1	6	1	1	6
Chula Vista	California	108	80	2	75.5%	197,011	2.8	5	1	5	2	2	5
Corona	California	102	50	1	75.3%	193,844	3.0	5	2	9	4	8	8
Fort Worth	Texas	108	92	10	20.8%	190,097	8.8	32	1	32	0	0	32
Tacoma	Washington	108	85	5	54.9%	182,972	5.6	20	1	20	0	3	20
Garland	Texas	125	92	2	75.3%	179,121	3.4	5	2	10	1	2	10
Tulsa	Oklahoma	109	90	5	42.2%	178,167	6.8	28	1	28	0	0	28
San Bernardino	California	105	83	3	70.4%	175,708	3.7	7	1	7	1	1	7
Fresno	California	110	84	8	28.9%	174,094	8.6	18	1	18	0	0	18
Nashville	Tennessee	112	96	6	35.3%	161,862	7.5	22	1	22	0	0	22
West Palm Beach	Florida	107	90	5	43.5%	161,289	6.5	12	1	12	0	0	12
Pensacola	Florida	101	83	3	59.2%	158,753	5.1	13	1	13	0	4	13
Gilbert	Arizona	104	79	3	66.3%	158,128	4.5	6	1	6	0	1	6
Salinas	California	100	69	1	83.2%	156,782	2.8	5	1	5	2	2	5
Hayward	California	116	71	1	80.3%	154,240	3.3	4	1	4	1	1	4
Toledo	Ohio	107	83	6	50.0%	153,790	6.0	15	1	15	0	0	15
Chesapeake	Virginia	108	68	3	64.6%	153,613	4.2	6	1	6	1	1	6
Van Nuys	California	101	85	1	86.3%	153,507	2.5	4	1	4	2	2	4
Lubbock	Texas	104	78	4	55.2%	152,652	5.1	14	1	14	0	4	14
Lancaster	California	106	87	2	81.9%	150,978	3.0	3	1	3	1	1	3
Buffalo	New York	106	82	8	26.4%	148,672	8.3	28	1	28	0	0	28
Reading	Pennsylvania	107	79	4	66.1%	142,317	4.4	10	2	20	0	4	20
Silver Spring	Maryland	111	83	6	46.4%	140,570	6.3	7	1	7	0	0	7
Newark	New Jersey	101	76	5	50.0%	140,297	6.0	9	1	9	0	0	9
North Las Vegas	Nevada	109	74	4	60.0%	140,282	5.0	7	2	14	0	0	14
Yonkers	New York	101	70	3	76.8%	138,592	3.4	5	1	5	1	1	5
Moreno Valley	California	128	92	2	66.4%	136,417	4.8	4	2	7	0	2	7
Aurora	Colorado	108	84	7	31.3%	136,122	8.0	11	2	22	0	0	22
Decatur	Georgia	108	88	2	75.2%	135,988	3.2	5	1	5	1	2	5
Laredo	Texas	105	73	5	50.0%	135,449	6.0	6	2	12	0	0	12
Beaverton	Oregon	99	76	4	66.1%	133,213	4.8	4	1	4	0	0	4
Mesquite	Texas	107	70	2	90.0%	131,682	2.0	3	1	3	0	3	3
Baltimore	Maryland	107	90	10	20.8%	131,023	8.9	22	1	22	0	0	22
Arlington	Texas	119	98	8	32.8%	130,165	7.8	12	1	12	0	0	12
Flushing	New York	102	64	4	60.0%	129,040	5.0	4	1	4	0	0	4
Olympia	Washington	105	82	4	70.0%	127,994	4.0	6	1	6	0	0	6
Rancho Cucamonga	California	108	86	3	72.1%	127,385	4.3	4	1	4	0	1	4
Boynton Beach	Florida	102	80	2	73.0%	127,055	4.0	6	1	6	0	2	6
Henrico	Virginia	101	84	4	65.7%	126,621	4.6	7	1	7	0	1	7
Woodbridge	Virginia	104	77	4	59.0%	124,782	5.3	3	2	6	0	0	6
Birmingham	Alabama	110	91	8	24.8%	123,934	8.3	30	1	30	0	0	30
Ontario	California	114	72	3	70.0%	123,654	4.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
Garden Grove	California	107	70	3	70.0%	123,033	4.0	5	2	9	0	0	9
Salem	Oregon	100	80	5	45.9%	122,357	6.4	7	1	7	0	0	7
Pomona	California	104	73	3	76.7%	121,206	3.0	3	1	3	1	1	3
Lake Worth	Florida	106	80	5	58.7%	121,177	4.6	5	1	5	0	1	5
Oxnard	California	100	74	6	54.3%	119,740	5.5	4	1	4	0	1	4
Compton	California	108	72	1	84.9%	117,946	2.3	3	2	6	2	4	6
San Diego	California	115	97	14	8.7%	117,709	11.8	36	1	36	0	0	2
Dayton	Ohio	103	79	8	24.1%	115,087	8.4	27	1	27	0	0	27
Eugene	Oregon	102	83	4	56.6%	114,920	5.5	6	1	6	0	1	6
Fort Collins	Colorado	102	81	3	58.9%	114,706	5.2	5	1	5	0	0	5
Tempe	Arizona	101	80	3	60.0%	113,998	5.0	4	1	4	0	0	4
Canton	Ohio	102	83	2	77.2%	113,514	3.3	12	1	12	3	3	12
Trenton	New Jersey	115	84	5	54.5%	113,432	5.6	11	2	22	0	2	22
Everett	Washington	102	80	4	68.0%	113,287	3.8	5	1	5	0	2	5
Scottsdale	Arizona	101	86	6	37.5%	111,956	7.5	11	1	11	0	0	11
Richmond	Virginia	107	87	7	28.6%	111,790	8.1	15	1	15	0	0	15
Pearland	Texas	98	71	1	80.8%	111,202	2.5	2	1	2	1	1	2
Kent	Washington	100	76	3	69.0%	110,679	4.3	4	1	4	0	1	4
Bradenton	Florida	101	83	6	43.4%	109,760	6.5	10	1	10	0	0	10
Virginia Beach	Virginia	101	74	7	24.3%	109,536	8.7	12	1	12	0	0	12
Henderson	Nevada	116	93	7	36.0%	109,090	7.5	8	2	15	0	0	15
Omaha	Nebraska	105	81	10	19.6%	108,282	9.2	31	1	31	0	0	31
Puyallup	Washington	103	69	2	74.5%	106,363	3.4	5	1	5	1	1	5
Pacoima	California	93	57	1	100.0%	105,799	1.0	1	2	2	1	2	2
Fremont	California	103	77	7	44.9%	104,779	6.3	4	2	8	0	0	8
Elk Grove	California	100	72	5	58.3%	104,564	5.0	3	1	3	0	1	3
Pueblo	Colorado	107	63	3	66.1%	104,497	4.6	7	1	7	0	1	7
Green Bay	Wisconsin	109	83	4	56.6%	103,793	5.4	7	1	7	0	1	7
Cincinnati	Ohio	110	93	8	12.8%	102,928	9.6	45	1	45	0	0	45
Cypress	Texas	100	73	3	60.0%	102,361	5.0	2	1	2	0	0	2
Washington DC	District of Columbia	114	89	10	14.8%	101,373	9.5	28	1	28	0	0	23
Seattle	Washington	120	101	10	10.6%	100,773	10.8	35	1	35	0	0	3
Whittier	California	111	70	4	51.3%	100,592	6.0	6	1	6	0	0	6
Akron	Ohio	109	80	6	37.2%	100,542	7.4	17	1	17	0	1	17
Oceanside	California	102	72	6	50.0%	100,130	6.0	4	1	4	0	0	4
Homestead	Florida	104	72	5	52.6%	98,686	5.3	7	2	14	0	2	14
Plano	Texas	104	82	6	32.3%	98,652	7.6	7	1	7	0	0	7
Saint Charles	Missouri	101	74	4	70.0%	97,901	4.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
Littleton	Colorado	109	84	7	30.0%	97,626	8.0	10	2	20	0	0	20
Arvada	Colorado	102	52	2	72.7%	97,002	3.4	5	1	5	1	1	5
Hawthorne	California	95	59	1	100.0%	96,836	1.0	1	2	2	1	2	2
Sylmar	California	94	50	1	100.0%	96,487	1.0	1	2	2	1	2	2
Youngstown	Ohio	107	71	4	60.7%	95,430	5.1	12	1	12	0	1	12
Grand Prairie	Texas	117	75	6	50.0%	95,273	6.0	4	1	4	0	0	4
Peoria	Arizona	103	82	4	54.7%	94,101	5.8	4	1	4	0	1	4
Perris	California	99	65	3	80.0%	93,912	3.0	2	3	4	0	2	4
Fontana	California	106	74	7	40.0%	93,891	7.0	3	2	6	0	0	6
Flint	Michigan	107	80	4	60.0%	93,280	5.0	7	1	7	0	0	7
Jackson	Mississippi	103	84	4	54.4%	92,606	5.6	11	1	11	0	0	11
Astoria	New York	115	66	4	64.8%	92,429	4.5	4	1	4	0	0	4
Elgin	Illinois	105	78	2	75.5%	92,250	3.0	3	1	3	1	1	3
Bell Gardens	California	96	55	2	90.0%	92,190	2.0	1	2	2	0	2	2
Sunnyvale	California	99	59	4	60.0%	91,664	5.0	4	1	4	0	0	4
Gaithersburg	Maryland	101	57	5	62.7%	90,644	4.8	5	1	5	0	0	5
Bothell	Washington	104	58	3	70.0%	89,795	4.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
Redding	California	100	78	2	79.2%	89,521	2.5	4	1	4	2	2	4
Roseville	California	101	86	4	64.0%	89,498	5.0	3	1	3	0	1	3
San Francisco	California	109	86	11	10.2%	88,876	10.7	28	1	28	0	0	6
Baytown	Texas	106	72	3	75.2%	88,592	4.0	3	1	3	0	1	3
Visalia	California	102	72	4	58.1%	88,316	5.0	3	1	3	0	1	3
Racine	Wisconsin	101	67	3	70.0%	88,251	4.0	5	1	5	0	0	5
Santa Clara	California	102	82	3	69.1%	86,778	4.5	4	1	4	0	1	4
Olathe	Kansas	98	69	2	60.0%	86,624	5.0	2	1	2	0	0	2
West Jordan	Utah	105	58	2	70.0%	86,499	4.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
El Cajon	California	100	68	5	50.0%	86,232	6.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
Orange	California	106	90	4	59.3%	85,915	5.2	5	3	10	0	0	10
Brockton	Massachusetts	100	73	2	90.0%	85,883	2.0	2	1	2	0	2	2
Edmond	Oklahoma	109	85	6	50.0%	85,853	6.0	5	1	5	0	0	5
Santa Maria	California	102	69	5	60.0%	85,853	5.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
Albuquerque	New Mexico	103	83	13	12.9%	84,548	10.5	17	1	17	0	0	3
Clovis	California	100	59	3	69.3%	84,071	4.0	3	1	3	0	1	3
Fayetteville	North Carolina	105	86	6	34.3%	83,715	7.5	8	1	8	0	0	8
Berkeley	California	114	82	3	65.8%	83,642	4.3	9	1	9	0	2	9
Fullerton	California	101	76	4	60.0%	83,566	5.0	4	2	8	0	0	8
Hamilton	Ohio	104	80	3	60.9%	83,430	4.7	3	2	6	0	0	6
Largo	Florida	111	80	1	77.2%	83,040	3.4	5	1	5	1	1	5
La Puente	California	89	41	3	70.0%	82,564	4.0	2	2	4	0	0	4
Frisco	Texas	106	86	6	47.9%	82,528	6.5	2	1	2	0	0	2
Palmdale	California	102	66	6	46.9%	82,054	6.3	4	1	4	0	0	4
Norman	Oklahoma	106	72	3	65.9%	81,776	4.3	4	1	4	0	1	4
Independence	Missouri	110	68	2	65.7%	81,505	4.6	8	1	8	0	0	8
Cambridge	Massachusetts	107	74	2	70.0%	81,054	4.0	5	1	5	0	0	5
Miami Beach	Florida	103	82	2	70.0%	80,992	4.4	5	1	5	0	1	5
Elizabeth	New Jersey	109	85	2	80.6%	80,988	3.0	3	1	3	0	2	3
Lehigh Acres	Florida	96	57	2	69.1%	80,797	4.0	6	2	12	1	2	12
Ogden	Utah	101	74	7	40.0%	80,572	7.0	5	1	5	0	0	5
Bowie	Maryland	102	66	2	78.8%	80,458	3.3	4	1	4	1	1	4
Deltona	Florida	97	64	1	85.3%	80,125	2.5	2	2	4	1	2	4
Dallas	Texas	114	96	18	5.7%	79,671	14.4	48	1	48	0	0	0
Modesto	California	102	76	7	30.0%	79,337	8.0	7	1	7	0	0	7
Denton	Texas	100	80	6	50.0%	79,078	6.0	6	1	6	0	0	6
Downey	California	100	71	2	70.0%	79,031	4.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
Naples	Florida	105	87	7	25.2%	78,865	8.6	14	1	14	0	0	14
Jersey City	New Jersey	106	81	8	30.0%	78,487	8.0	7	1	7	0	0	7
Schenectady	New York	105	59	7	48.1%	77,923	6.3	8	1	8	0	0	8
Bellevue	Washington	100	80	6	53.2%	77,775	5.8	5	1	5	0	0	5
Menifee	California	99	57	4	70.0%	77,371	4.0	4	2	8	0	0	8
Broken Arrow	Oklahoma	105	61	6	59.2%	77,279	5.0	3	1	3	0	1	3
Pittsburg	California	100	72	3	80.0%	76,865	3.0	1	1	1	0	1	1
Sterling Heights	Michigan	98	69	3	57.9%	76,674	5.3	4	1	4	0	1	4
Lynnwood	Washington	99	65	4	70.0%	75,872	4.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
El Monte	California	98	70	2	80.4%	75,298	3.5	2	1	2	0	1	2
Warren	Michigan	119	93	1	55.4%	74,949	5.4	5	3	10	0	0	10
Saint Augustine	Florida	103	77	4	57.0%	74,760	5.2	5	1	5	0	0	5
Ridgewood	New York	88	66	3	70.0%	74,702	4.0	1	1	1	0	0	1
Honolulu	Hawaii	104	77	11	17.7%	73,804	9.9	11	1	11	0	0	4
Memphis	Tennessee	105	84	13	10.6%	73,700	11.3	26	1	26	0	0	6
Keller	Texas	100	76	3	63.4%	73,692	4.5	2	2	4	0	0	4
Madera	California	110	62	2	71.5%	73,593	4.0	3	1	3	0	1	3
Murfreesboro	Tennessee	103	84	7	39.3%	73,266	7.2	5	1	5	0	0	5
Cleveland	Ohio	108	94	10	9.8%	73,249	11.5	29	1	29	0	0	10
Melbourne	Florida	115	80	7	46.0%	71,636	6.4	5	1	5	0	0	5
Sparks	Nevada	102	73	2	60.0%	71,560	5.0	4	2	8	0	0	8
Bethlehem	Pennsylvania	105	81	5	56.9%	71,265	5.3	4	1	4	0	0	4
San Mateo	California	107	82	6	50.0%	71,192	6.0	4	1	4	0	0	4
San Marcos	California	99	71	1	70.0%	70,337	4.0	2	1	2	0	0	2
Federal Way	Washington	102	70	3	70.0%	70,100	4.0	2	1	2	0	0	2
Sacramento	California	106	87	14	8.6%	69,478	11.9	28	1	28	0	0	1
Tampa	Florida	111	91	13	8.7%	69,223	11.8	27	1	27	0	0	2
Mission Viejo	California	103	75	3	70.0%	68,851	4.0	2	1	2	0	0	2
Fairfield	California	99	78	5	60.0%	68,447	5.0	2	1	2	0	0	2
Coral Springs	Florida	106	82	3	70.0%	68,067	4.0	2	1	2	0	0	2
Norfolk	Virginia	111	75	7	27.7%	68,059	8.6	14	1	14	0	0	14
Santa Barbara	California	101	74	7	50.0%	67,942	6.0	7	1	7	0	0	7
Kenosha	Wisconsin	101	61	4	60.0%	67,728	5.0	4	1	4	0	0	4
New Port Richey	Florida	104	80	5	55.8%	67,438	5.3	4	1	4	0	1	4
Missouri City	Texas	97	56	2	63.4%	67,311	4.5	2	2	4	0	0	4
Indio	California	99	61	3	70.0%	67,264	4.0	2	1	2	0	0	2
Allen	Texas	102	81	3	60.0%	66,763	5.0	2	1	2	0	0	2
San Leandro	California	94	52	4	60.0%	66,712	5.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
Bakersfield	California	105	83	10	11.9%	66,650	10.6	11	2	22	0	0	2
South Gate	California	92	46	4	70.0%	66,572	4.0	1	2	2	0	0	2
Antioch	California	101	52	3	60.0%	66,433	5.0	2	1	2	0	0	2
Reno	Nevada	104	84	11	22.4%	66,411	8.6	12	1	12	0	0	12
Naperville	Illinois	99	76	6	40.0%	66,323	7.0	4	1	4	0	0	4
Ballwin	Missouri	103	46	3	70.0%	66,268	4.0	2	2	4	0	0	4
Sandy	Utah	103	83	3	60.0%	66,263	5.0	4	2	6	0	0	6
Milton	Florida	99	71	2	69.7%	66,075	4.0	3	2	6	0	2	6
Hartford	Connecticut	105	84	5	53.4%	65,853	5.5	6	1	6	0	0	6
Elmhurst	New York	94	70	1	70.0%	65,777	4.0	1	2	2	0	0	2
Port Saint Lucie	Florida	110	83	9	32.3%	65,636	7.5	6	1	6	0	0	6
Herndon	Virginia	103	70	3	70.0%	65,421	4.0	2	1	2	0	0	2
Medford	Oregon	103	78	4	70.0%	65,276	4.0	2	1	2	0	0	2
Ypsilanti	Michigan	103	55	4	60.9%	65,089	4.5	2	1	2	0	1	2
Sarasota	Florida	103	88	9	25.9%	64,945	8.5	13	1	13	0	0	13
Tracy	California	109	84	4	55.3%	64,730	5.3	4	1	4	0	0	4
Orlando	Florida	107	97	14	6.5%	64,477	14.0	32	1	32	0	0	3
Temecula	California	99	81	6	49.5%	64,297	6.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
Paterson	New Jersey	112	85	5	43.8%	63,788	6.7	9	1	9	0	0	9
High Point	North Carolina	104	58	5	52.0%	63,591	5.8	4	1	4	0	0	4
Vacaville	California	92	51	4	60.0%	63,178	5.0	2	1	2	0	0	2
Muskegon	Michigan	98	59	6	48.3%	62,411	6.4	5	1	5	0	0	5
Acworth	Georgia	97	59	3	62.5%	62,334	4.5	2	2	4	0	1	4
Edinburg	Texas	100	54	6	40.0%	62,228	7.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
Quincy	Massachusetts	106	84	3	66.1%	62,219	5.3	3	1	3	0	1	3
Davenport	Iowa	106	75	4	59.2%	62,121	5.0	6	1	6	0	1	6
Ventura	California	100	73	4	53.5%	62,065	6.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
Renton	Washington	100	68	4	40.0%	61,940	7.0	5	1	5	0	0	5
Vista	California	108	85	5	51.4%	61,636	5.7	3	1	3	0	0	3
North Hollywood	California	104	67	7	40.0%	61,252	7.0	4	3	8	0	0	8
Costa Mesa	California	101	76	5	53.3%	60,664	5.5	2	1	2	0	0	2
New Bedford	Massachusetts	98	67	3	63.8%	60,488	5.3	4	1	4	0	1	4
Lakewood	New Jersey	100	76	5	60.0%	60,458	5.0	1	1	1	0	0	1
Victorville	California	99	69	5	44.3%	60,344	6.7	3	1	3	0	0	3
Killeen	Texas	98	58	7	40.0%	60,017	7.3	4	1	4	0	0	4
Florissant	Missouri	96	51	5	55.2%	59,789	5.3	3	2	4	0	0	4
Hyattsville	Maryland	87	60	6	37.9%	59,754	7.2	5	2	10	0	0	10
South Bend	Indiana	103	78	5	40.7%	59,740	7.4	10	2	20	0	0	20
Waukegan	Illinois	103	79	4	60.0%	58,517	5.0	2	1	2	0	0	2
Torrance	California	107	86	5	32.7%	57,876	7.8	5	2	10	0	0	10
Rockville	Maryland	107	93	5	39.7%	57,409	6.8	4	1	4	0	0	4
Raleigh	North Carolina	105	88	13	10.5%	57,150	9.9	15	1	15	0	0	13
Anchorage	Alaska	102	77	9	23.3%	56,881	8.5	12	1	12	0	0	12
Lynn	Massachusetts	100	72	5	60.0%	56,123	5.0	4	1	4	0	0	4
Newnan	Georgia	106	66	5	60.0%	56,037	5.0	2	1	2	0	0	2
Chico	California	99	69	4	50.0%	56,008	6.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
College Station	Texas	97	65	6	45.4%	55,838	6.5	2	2	4	0	0	4
Auburn	Washington	103	78	7	49.2%	55,501	6.0	3	2	6	0	0	6
Amarillo	Texas	104	72	7	23.9%	54,821	9.4	14	1	14	0	0	11
Midlothian	Virginia	97	60	6	55.7%	53,951	5.0	3	2	6	0	1	6
Carrollton	Texas	110	79	7	40.0%	53,924	7.0	3	2	6	0	0	6
Joliet	Illinois	103	83	5	41.6%	53,622	7.4	5	1	5	0	0	5
Saint Petersburg	Florida	105	85	10	15.0%	53,562	9.9	16	2	20	0	0	12
Inglewood	California	110	63	7	40.0%	53,520	7.0	5	3	10	0	0	10
Hemet	California	101	64	6	41.4%	53,313	7.0	3	3	5	0	0	5
Rialto	California	108	73	6	50.0%	53,292	6.0	2	2	4	0	0	4
Riverview	Florida	103	58	6	47.4%	52,762	6.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
Cape Coral	Florida	101	67	8	29.2%	52,739	8.0	6	1	6	0	0	6
Burbank	California	107	81	4	48.5%	52,410	6.4	5	1	5	0	0	5
Elkhart	Indiana	104	59	6	52.3%	51,979	5.7	3	1	3	0	0	3
Simi Valley	California	103	73	7	40.0%	51,485	7.0	2	1	2	0	0	2
Lexington	Kentucky	116	90	12	16.1%	51,373	9.7	15	1	15	0	0	13
Laurel	Maryland	112	82	7	45.6%	51,247	6.5	4	2	5	0	0	5
Harrisburg	Pennsylvania	102	80	7	30.0%	50,814	8.0	9	1	9	0	0	9
Pittsburgh	Pennsylvania	106	88	13	7.4%	50,722	12.5	39	2	78	0	0	6
Rochester	New York	106	87	13	10.6%	50,088	11.5	24	3	34	0	0	6
Kennesaw	Georgia	104	69	6	50.0%	49,565	6.0	2	1	2	0	0	2
Wichita Falls	Texas	98	52	6	50.0%	49,421	6.0	7	1	7	0	0	7
Humble	Texas	102	68	9	29.6%	49,279	8.0	3	2	5	0	0	4
Winston Salem	North Carolina	99	78	11	18.5%	48,882	9.3	9	1	9	0	0	9
Jamaica	New York	101	58	6	20.0%	48,781	9.0	6	1	6	0	0	6
Appleton	Wisconsin	100	80	4	40.0%	48,681	7.0	4	1	4	0	0	4
Escondido	California	98	72	8	26.8%	48,215	8.3	4	1	4	0	0	4
Portsmouth	Virginia	106	77	4	50.4%	48,076	6.1	7	1	7	0	0	7
Delray Beach	Florida	106	86	6	40.0%	47,626	7.0	5	1	5	0	0	5
Lewisville	Texas	96	73	8	40.0%	47,471	7.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
Stone Mountain	Georgia	101	54	7	36.9%	47,324	7.3	3	2	4	0	0	4
Chino	California	101	72	5	50.0%	47,237	6.0	2	2	4	0	0	4
Grand Junction	Colorado	99	67	4	44.5%	46,915	6.5	6	1	6	0	0	6
Duluth	Minnesota	112	83	7	40.0%	46,894	6.8	11	1	11	0	2	11
Cary	North Carolina	102	77	8	30.0%	46,600	8.0	4	2	8	0	0	8
Saginaw	Michigan	109	73	7	35.1%	45,788	7.6	7	1	7	0	0	7
Redwood City	California	119	87	6	40.0%	45,785	7.0	4	1	4	0	0	4
Clearwater	Florida	107	83	8	24.6%	45,085	8.7	9	1	9	0	0	9
Worcester	Massachusetts	113	91	7	24.2%	44,940	8.6	9	1	9	0	0	9
Fort Pierce	Florida	99	68	7	46.9%	44,863	6.3	8	1	8	0	0	8
Meridian	Idaho	108	73	8	43.0%	44,775	6.5	2	3	4	0	0	4
Lawrenceville	Georgia	105	84	9	17.4%	44,674	9.3	4	1	4	0	0	3
Palm Bay	Florida	117	74	5	40.0%	44,516	7.0	4	3	8	0	0	8
Yuma	Arizona	101	60	7	30.0%	44,279	8.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
Surprise	Arizona	100	58	6	32.4%	43,863	7.3	4	2	8	0	0	8
West Covina	California	101	77	7	40.0%	43,763	7.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
Frederick	Maryland	101	82	6	32.8%	43,317	7.8	4	2	5	0	0	5
Waco	Texas	101	71	8	27.3%	43,235	8.7	9	1	9	0	0	9
Vallejo	California	103	51	6	34.4%	42,873	7.8	4	3	7	0	0	7
Belleville	Illinois	106	81	7	45.9%	42,781	6.3	4	1	4	0	0	4
Cumming	Georgia	101	81	7	26.3%	42,565	9.0	3	1	3	0	0	2
Holland	Michigan	130	82	6	44.8%	42,098	6.5	2	1	2	0	0	2
Hesperia	California	93	48	6	40.0%	41,524	7.0	2	2	4	0	0	4
Merced	California	100	47	6	40.0%	41,224	7.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
Hillsboro	Oregon	99	67	6	40.0%	41,148	7.0	2	1	2	0	0	2
Rockford	Illinois	105	83	8	22.6%	41,143	8.7	9	1	9	0	0	9
Buford	Georgia	99	68	6	41.3%	40,896	7.0	2	2	4	0	0	4
Carlsbad	California	100	81	6	36.0%	40,885	7.3	4	2	8	0	0	8
Daly City	California	94	46	5	35.7%	40,809	7.5	2	2	4	0	0	4
Woodstock	Georgia	100	78	6	40.0%	40,688	7.0	2	1	2	0	0	2
Huntington Beach	California	103	82	11	20.0%	39,981	9.0	4	2	8	0	0	8
Newport News	Virginia	103	51	8	22.6%	39,957	8.7	7	1	7	0	0	7
Annapolis	Maryland	103	85	7	42.0%	39,942	6.4	5	1	5	0	0	5
Hagerstown	Maryland	98	51	7	40.0%	39,174	7.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
Apopka	Florida	104	60	7	40.0%	39,062	7.0	2	2	4	0	0	4
Lithonia	Georgia	101	54	6	40.0%	38,705	7.0	2	2	3	0	0	3
Mobile	Alabama	108	85	10	14.3%	38,684	11.8	18	1	18	0	0	3
Livermore	California	95	45	6	40.0%	38,501	7.0	2	1	2	0	0	2
Concord	California	103	84	7	29.5%	38,429	8.0	4	2	8	0	0	8
Allentown	Pennsylvania	102	84	8	22.6%	38,358	9.9	7	1	7	0	0	3
Waukesha	Wisconsin	102	79	6	40.0%	38,318	7.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
Spokane	Washington	100	85	11	10.5%	37,919	9.8	14	1	14	0	0	14
Scranton	Pennsylvania	103	82	6	38.1%	37,919	7.3	8	1	8	0	0	8
Santa Monica	California	108	93	5	40.0%	37,764	7.0	5	1	5	0	0	5
Muncie	Indiana	93	45	6	40.0%	37,104	7.0	5	1	5	0	0	5
Rio Rancho	New Mexico	97	53	7	36.9%	35,914	7.5	2	2	4	0	0	4
Columbia	South Carolina	104	87	11	10.4%	35,770	11.6	14	1	14	0	0	5
Clermont	Florida	96	60	6	35.4%	35,461	7.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
Spring Hill	Florida	109	64	8	27.9%	35,003	8.2	5	1	5	0	0	5
Nampa	Idaho	103	66	7	30.0%	34,772	8.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
Richardson	Texas	100	75	6	30.0%	34,379	8.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
Greeley	Colorado	95	56	7	30.0%	34,220	8.0	2	1	2	0	0	2
Ashburn	Virginia	96	48	7	30.0%	33,692	8.0	2	2	4	0	0	4
Englewood	Colorado	116	91	8	30.0%	33,476	8.0	4	3	8	0	0	8
Douglasville	Georgia	96	50	9	30.0%	33,074	8.0	2	1	2	0	0	2
Roanoke	Virginia	101	85	8	19.5%	32,968	9.1	10	1	10	0	0	10
Falls Church	Virginia	104	73	9	26.3%	31,686	8.4	5	1	5	0	0	5
Plainfield	Illinois	106	79	10	31.8%	31,339	8.7	3	2	4	0	0	3
Brownsville	Texas	101	65	10	15.4%	31,053	9.3	3	1	3	0	0	3
Lees Summit	Missouri	104	76	8	30.4%	31,041	7.8	6	1	6	0	0	6
Bloomington	Indiana	102	81	10	23.0%	30,682	9.5	6	2	12	0	0	6
Salt Lake City	Utah	104	88	15	6.2%	30,318	13.7	19	1	19	0	0	0
Edison	New Jersey	99	72	11	30.0%	30,248	8.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
Orem	Utah	99	67	7	30.0%	30,095	8.0	3	2	6	0	0	6
Johnson City	Tennessee	106	66	8	31.3%	29,863	8.3	4	1	4	0	0	4
Atlanta	Georgia	114	96	24	3.0%	29,833	17.1	39	1	39	0	0	0
Kennewick	Washington	106	82	7	30.0%	29,643	8.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
Jupiter	Florida	101	76	7	30.0%	29,569	8.0	4	1	4	0	0	4
Syracuse	New York	103	85	8	13.0%	29,562	9.7	15	1	15	0	0	15
Anderson	South Carolina	100	79	7	30.0%	29,508	7.8	4	3	7	0	0	7
Palo Alto	California	104	78	11	30.0%	29,004	8.0	4	1	4	0	0	4
Katy	Texas	100	76	12	8.4%	28,728	11.8	4	1	4	0	0	0
Grand Rapids	Michigan	108	86	14	7.6%	28,030	12.4	12	1	12	0	0	2
New Braunfels	Texas	101	66	8	27.2%	27,976	8.5	2	1	2	0	0	2
Franklin	Tennessee	101	83	8	25.3%	26,959	8.7	3	2	6	0	0	6
Ocala	Florida	100	82	11	11.9%	26,791	10.5	11	1	11	0	0	2
Knoxville	Tennessee	108	90	18	6.9%	26,662	13.1	17	1	17	0	0	1
York	Pennsylvania	113	90	10	14.6%	26,270	10.7	7	2	9	0	0	2
Daytona Beach	Florida	100	78	7	24.6%	25,331	8.0	5	1	5	0	0	5
Durham	North Carolina	112	92	13	8.7%	25,184	11.4	8	1	8	0	0	1
Irving	Texas	104	70	16	10.4%	25,084	11.5	6	2	12	0	0	2
Dearborn	Michigan	113	85	8	26.2%	24,903	8.5	4	1	4	0	0	4
Vero Beach	Florida	100	77	9	21.5%	24,822	9.0	6	1	6	0	0	6
Summerville	South Carolina	101	79	11	17.6%	24,475	9.5	2	1	2	0	0	1
Baton Rouge	Louisiana	104	96	18	6.4%	24,079	13.9	18	1	18	0	0	0
Lansing	Michigan	109	80	10	14.6%	23,938	9.7	7	1	7	0	0	6
Lafayette	Louisiana	99	83	11	14.9%	23,919	9.4	5	1	5	0	0	5
Montgomery	Alabama	101	85	11	11.4%	23,896	11.5	13	2	26	0	0	2
Midland	Texas	102	85	11	14.9%	23,857	9.8	5	1	5	0	0	4
Las Cruces	New Mexico	100	65	9	15.5%	23,085	9.6	7	1	7	0	0	7
West Chester	Pennsylvania	99	84	6	20.9%	22,681	8.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
Overland Park	Kansas	104	89	12	12.2%	22,350	11.1	9	1	9	0	0	2
Lowell	Massachusetts	103	74	8	20.0%	22,268	9.0	4	1	4	0	0	4
Rapid City	South Dakota	104	63	10	22.4%	21,721	9.0	3	1	3	0	0	2
Evansville	Indiana	100	82	14	11.3%	20,934	11.3	9	1	9	0	0	2
Santa Cruz	California	105	73	8	20.0%	20,810	9.0	4	1	4	0	0	4
Bellingham	Washington	101	71	8	16.1%	20,311	9.3	3	1	3	0	0	3
Wilmington	Delaware	102	86	11	9.2%	20,166	11.8	10	1	10	0	0	1
Gulfport	Mississippi	102	77	9	21.2%	20,073	10.0	3	1	3	0	0	1
Charlottesville	Virginia	97	66	10	15.9%	19,575	10.4	5	1	5	0	0	1
Metairie	Louisiana	100	85	12	13.6%	19,334	10.8	5	1	5	0	0	2
Napa	California	99	58	9	20.0%	19,333	9.0	2	1	2	0	0	2
New Orleans	Louisiana	106	87	24	4.5%	19,265	15.6	19	1	19	0	0	0
Morgantown	West Virginia	102	75	10	20.0%	19,057	9.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
Boise	Idaho	103	80	15	7.4%	18,845	12.7	9	1	9	0	0	1
Livonia	Michigan	106	75	9	19.9%	18,815	9.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
Roswell	Georgia	100	75	10	18.8%	18,732	9.5	2	2	4	0	0	2
Albany	New York	102	83	14	11.9%	17,939	9.7	11	1	11	0	0	11
Kansas City	Missouri	116	94	36	3.1%	17,577	16.9	49	1	49	0	0	0
Panama City	Florida	103	70	10	13.8%	17,419	10.0	6	1	6	0	0	3
Ann Arbor	Michigan	102	80	12	10.4%	17,291	12.2	5	1	5	0	0	1
Fort Wayne	Indiana	101	81	18	5.3%	16,802	14.6	16	1	16	0	0	0
Round Rock	Texas	98	72	11	10.0%	16,750	10.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
Hampton	Virginia	100	55	9	12.1%	16,494	9.7	6	1	6	0	0	5
Fairfax	Virginia	101	84	9	10.0%	16,364	10.0	4	1	4	0	0	4
Conroe	Texas	108	75	11	10.0%	16,032	10.0	7	1	7	0	0	7
Fredericksburg	Virginia	104	78	10	9.2%	15,936	11.0	5	1	5	0	0	1
Toms River	New Jersey	102	83	9	12.8%	15,686	9.7	3	1	3	0	0	3
Fort Myers	Florida	102	83	15	6.2%	15,501	13.5	11	1	11	0	0	0
Boca Raton	Florida	104	83	17	6.8%	15,127	13.1	9	1	9	0	0	0
Waterbury	Connecticut	107	84	12	13.9%	15,121	9.5	6	1	6	0	0	6
Madison	Wisconsin	104	90	15	5.1%	15,020	14.6	14	2	15	0	0	1
Des Moines	Iowa	106	100	17	6.7%	14,920	13.5	11	1	11	0	0	0
Santa Fe	New Mexico	101	74	12	11.5%	14,737	10.6	5	1	5	0	0	2
Covington	Georgia	107	70	7	15.9%	14,693	9.5	2	1	2	0	0	2
Austin	Texas	108	86	34	1.3%	14,484	20.6	44	1	44	0	0	0
Lynchburg	Virginia	103	66	11	13.8%	14,133	9.5	4	1	4	0	0	4
Charlotte	North Carolina	105	96	33	1.5%	13,323	18.5	24	1	24	0	0	0
Alpharetta	Georgia	107	85	15	7.0%	13,243	13.0	4	3	8	0	0	0
Minneapolis	Minnesota	115	96	26	1.2%	13,116	19.6	51	1	51	0	0	0
Yakima	Washington	100	56	11	10.0%	12,985	10.0	4	1	4	0	0	4
Pasadena	California	108	83	14	8.2%	12,902	11.8	6	1	6	0	0	0
Clarksville	Tennessee	100	68	12	7.2%	12,628	13.0	3	1	3	0	0	0
Broomfield	Colorado	107	69	12	11.9%	12,427	11.0	3	2	6	0	0	2
Tuscaloosa	Alabama	98	76	10	10.0%	12,264	10.0	4	1	4	0	0	4
Augusta	Georgia	102	88	16	5.9%	12,007	13.4	8	1	8	0	0	1
Riverside	California	105	90	21	3.2%	11,926	17.0	7	2	14	0	0	0
Lakeland	Florida	103	86	16	4.4%	11,427	15.7	9	1	9	0	0	0
Wichita	Kansas	104	77	18	2.7%	11,275	17.3	26	1	26	0	0	0
Phoenix	Arizona	129	112	56	0.8%	11,220	41.6	42	1	42	0	0	0
Cedar Rapids	Iowa	102	75	13	8.0%	11,156	12.0	6	1	6	0	0	0
Mission	Texas	102	78	12	6.1%	11,072	13.7	3	2	4	0	0	0
Kalamazoo	Michigan	99	70	16	6.7%	10,946	13.3	7	1	7	0	0	0
Macon	Georgia	102	85	15	6.6%	10,804	13.3	9	1	9	0	0	0
Longmont	Colorado	100	62	9	8.0%	10,461	12.0	3	1	3	0	0	0
Mckinney	Texas	104	87	12	5.4%	10,279	15.3	3	2	5	0	0	0
Shreveport	Louisiana	102	78	19	4.5%	10,117	15.4	12	2	18	0	0	0
Odessa	Texas	111	78	11	6.3%	10,107	13.7	6	2	12	0	0	0
Erie	Pennsylvania	108	83	12	5.5%	10,006	14.5	13	1	13	0	0	0
Bridgeport	Connecticut	101	77	17	6.8%	9,987	12.8	6	2	11	0	0	0
Chattanooga	Tennessee	101	83	21	4.7%	9,693	15.3	15	1	15	0	0	0
San Angelo	Texas	95	58	8	8.7%	9,664	11.3	4	1	4	0	0	0
Mcdonough	Georgia	100	73	10	9.0%	9,132	11.0	2	2	4	0	0	0
Clinton Township	Michigan	101	66	9	9.0%	9,027	11.0	3	1	3	0	0	0
Mcallen	Texas	100	81	13	6.2%	8,759	14.0	3	1	3	0	0	0
Winter Haven	Florida	98	54	10	8.0%	8,550	12.0	3	1	3	0	0	0
Athens	Georgia	103	83	12	6.8%	8,515	13.2	6	2	12	0	0	1
Norwalk	California	101	70	12	8.0%	8,471	12.0	1	1	1	0	0	0
O Fallon	Missouri	98	62	10	8.5%	8,213	11.5	2	3	3	0	0	0
Boulder	Colorado	100	84	15	6.2%	8,117	14.0	6	1	6	0	0	0
Gainesville	Florida	101	80	15	3.8%	7,892	15.9	10	3	14	0	0	0
Westerville	Ohio	101	64	11	8.0%	7,617	12.0	2	2	4	0	0	0
Rock Hill	South Carolina	103	78	14	6.5%	7,575	14.0	3	1	3	0	0	0
Champaign	Illinois	102	76	11	8.0%	7,565	12.0	3	1	3	0	0	0
Providence	Rhode Island	104	90	18	3.7%	7,553	16.6	8	1	8	0	0	0
Parker	Colorado	99	83	12	7.3%	7,356	12.5	2	1	2	0	0	0
Bend	Oregon	100	76	11	6.0%	7,335	14.0	3	2	6	0	0	0
Stamford	Connecticut	100	78	16	5.2%	6,727	14.7	6	2	12	0	0	0
Sioux Falls	South Dakota	100	73	16	3.6%	6,561	16.1	9	3	18	0	0	0
Gastonia	North Carolina	98	63	13	6.0%	6,431	14.0	3	1	3	0	0	0
Bryan	Texas	104	90	14	6.7%	6,430	13.2	5	1	5	0	0	0
Manassas	Virginia	95	74	12	4.0%	6,077	16.0	4	2	8	0	0	0
Manchester	New Hampshire	103	78	15	5.2%	5,989	14.2	5	4	10	0	0	0
Valdosta	Georgia	96	64	13	6.1%	5,803	13.4	5	2	10	0	0	0
Billings	Montana	99	76	16	4.2%	5,752	15.8	4	1	4	0	0	0
Fort Mill	South Carolina	104	70	13	6.0%	5,713	14.0	3	2	6	0	0	0
Springdale	Arkansas	102	63	14	5.6%	5,385	14.5	2	2	4	0	0	0
Longview	Texas	106	73	14	5.0%	5,303	15.2	5	1	5	0	0	0
Sugar Land	Texas	107	86	16	3.0%	5,068	17.0	3	1	3	0	0	0
Marietta	Georgia	100	80	19	1.5%	4,969	19.3	7	2	14	0	0	0
Idaho Falls	Idaho	100	63	14	4.4%	4,791	15.8	4	1	4	0	0	0
Lawrence	Kansas	102	81	16	4.6%	4,659	15.2	5	4	10	0	0	0
Santa Rosa	California	100	85	16	2.0%	4,321	18.0	6	1	6	0	0	0
Springfield	Missouri	113	93	19	1.9%	4,287	18.1	7	2	12	0	0	0
Corpus Christi	Texas	106	89	23	1.3%	4,123	19.6	18	1	18	0	0	0
Savannah	Georgia	101	85	19	1.6%	3,812	18.6	10	1	10	0	0	0
Lincoln	Nebraska	110	78	26	1.3%	3,756	20.3	22	3	39	0	0	0
Terre Haute	Indiana	105	51	16	3.8%	3,567	16.3	6	2	12	0	0	0
Greensboro	North Carolina	102	84	23	1.0%	3,409	21.4	9	1	9	0	0	0
Provo	Utah	102	71	16	2.9%	3,403	17.0	3	2	6	0	0	0
New Haven	Connecticut	100	78	17	2.5%	3,234	17.0	5	1	5	0	0	0
Bowling Green	Kentucky	98	66	15	2.6%	3,054	17.3	4	1	4	0	0	0
Irvine	California	104	84	26	1.1%	2,930	19.6	9	2	11	0	0	0
Chapel Hill	North Carolina	101	78	16	2.8%	2,790	17.3	3	2	6	0	0	0
Tallahassee	Florida	102	84	27	0.9%	2,709	24.7	10	1	10	0	0	0
Murrieta	California	104	79	16	2.0%	2,645	18.0	2	2	4	0	0	0
Huntsville	Alabama	103	84	22	1.2%	2,402	19.1	11	1	11	0	0	0
West Valley City	Utah	108	54	18	1.7%	2,320	22.3	3	1	3	0	0	0
Greenville	South Carolina	104	90	23	1.0%	2,163	20.6	9	1	9	0	0	0
Topeka	Kansas	107	77	20	1.2%	2,027	20.5	18	2	36	0	0	0
Little Rock	Arkansas	100	78	41	0.8%	1,716	40.1	12	1	12	0	0	0
Spartanburg	South Carolina	102	81	20	1.3%	1,432	19.4	5	1	5	0	0	0
Boston	Massachusetts	106	82	28	0.9%	1,426	25.6	14	1	14	0	0	0
Beaumont	Texas	103	74	24	0.9%	1,339	26.6	8	1	8	0	0	0
Abilene	Texas	106	62	18	1.0%	1,294	19.7	6	1	6	0	0	0
Lake Charles	Louisiana	98	73	17	1.0%	1,294	20.0	5	2	10	0	0	0
Fargo	North Dakota	101	74	20	1.0%	1,200	21.5	4	1	4	0	0	0
Asheville	North Carolina	102	87	29	0.9%	1,162	31.0	5	1	5	0	0	0
Tyler	Texas	102	88	44	0.7%	1,140	46.3	9	1	9	0	0	0
Myrtle Beach	South Carolina	99	81	50	0.7%	961	52.8	5	1	5	0	0	0
Charleston	South Carolina	104	89	71	0.5%	949	71.1	10	1	10	0	0	0

California

City	Competition	Business intelligence metrics	RAW Data (Google Search Results across all ZIPs)
Los Angeles	126	102	7	35.9%	883,208	7.3	62	1	62	0	0	62
San Jose	108	96	3	53.4%	560,802	5.5	28	1	28	0	2	28
Stockton	106	83	2	73.0%	272,706	3.8	12	1	12	2	2	12
Anaheim	109	84	1	73.2%	269,954	3.6	7	2	14	1	2	14
Oakland	115	97	4	63.7%	262,466	4.6	14	1	14	0	2	14
Long Beach	103	86	5	50.0%	239,485	6.0	12	1	12	0	0	12
Santa Ana	104	85	3	58.7%	209,600	5.2	6	1	6	0	0	6
Chula Vista	108	80	2	75.5%	197,011	2.8	5	1	5	2	2	5
Corona	102	50	1	75.3%	193,844	3.0	5	2	9	4	8	8
San Bernardino	105	83	3	70.4%	175,708	3.7	7	1	7	1	1	7
Fresno	110	84	8	28.9%	174,094	8.6	18	1	18	0	0	18
Salinas	100	69	1	83.2%	156,782	2.8	5	1	5	2	2	5
Hayward	116	71	1	80.3%	154,240	3.3	4	1	4	1	1	4
Van Nuys	101	85	1	86.3%	153,507	2.5	4	1	4	2	2	4
Lancaster	106	87	2	81.9%	150,978	3.0	3	1	3	1	1	3
Moreno Valley	128	92	2	66.4%	136,417	4.8	4	2	7	0	2	7
Rancho Cucamonga	108	86	3	72.1%	127,385	4.3	4	1	4	0	1	4
Ontario	114	72	3	70.0%	123,654	4.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
Garden Grove	107	70	3	70.0%	123,033	4.0	5	2	9	0	0	9
Pomona	104	73	3	76.7%	121,206	3.0	3	1	3	1	1	3
Oxnard	100	74	6	54.3%	119,740	5.5	4	1	4	0	1	4
Compton	108	72	1	84.9%	117,946	2.3	3	2	6	2	4	6
San Diego	115	97	14	8.7%	117,709	11.8	36	1	36	0	0	2
Pacoima	93	57	1	100.0%	105,799	1.0	1	2	2	1	2	2
Fremont	103	77	7	44.9%	104,779	6.3	4	2	8	0	0	8
Elk Grove	100	72	5	58.3%	104,564	5.0	3	1	3	0	1	3
Whittier	111	70	4	51.3%	100,592	6.0	6	1	6	0	0	6
Oceanside	102	72	6	50.0%	100,130	6.0	4	1	4	0	0	4
Hawthorne	95	59	1	100.0%	96,836	1.0	1	2	2	1	2	2
Sylmar	94	50	1	100.0%	96,487	1.0	1	2	2	1	2	2
Perris	99	65	3	80.0%	93,912	3.0	2	3	4	0	2	4
Fontana	106	74	7	40.0%	93,891	7.0	3	2	6	0	0	6
Bell Gardens	96	55	2	90.0%	92,190	2.0	1	2	2	0	2	2
Sunnyvale	99	59	4	60.0%	91,664	5.0	4	1	4	0	0	4
Redding	100	78	2	79.2%	89,521	2.5	4	1	4	2	2	4
Roseville	101	86	4	64.0%	89,498	5.0	3	1	3	0	1	3
San Francisco	109	86	11	10.2%	88,876	10.7	28	1	28	0	0	6
Visalia	102	72	4	58.1%	88,316	5.0	3	1	3	0	1	3
Santa Clara	102	82	3	69.1%	86,778	4.5	4	1	4	0	1	4
El Cajon	100	68	5	50.0%	86,232	6.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
Orange	106	90	4	59.3%	85,915	5.2	5	3	10	0	0	10
Santa Maria	102	69	5	60.0%	85,853	5.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
Clovis	100	59	3	69.3%	84,071	4.0	3	1	3	0	1	3
Berkeley	114	82	3	65.8%	83,642	4.3	9	1	9	0	2	9
Fullerton	101	76	4	60.0%	83,566	5.0	4	2	8	0	0	8
La Puente	89	41	3	70.0%	82,564	4.0	2	2	4	0	0	4
Palmdale	102	66	6	46.9%	82,054	6.3	4	1	4	0	0	4
Modesto	102	76	7	30.0%	79,337	8.0	7	1	7	0	0	7
Downey	100	71	2	70.0%	79,031	4.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
Menifee	99	57	4	70.0%	77,371	4.0	4	2	8	0	0	8
Pittsburg	100	72	3	80.0%	76,865	3.0	1	1	1	0	1	1
El Monte	98	70	2	80.4%	75,298	3.5	2	1	2	0	1	2
Madera	110	62	2	71.5%	73,593	4.0	3	1	3	0	1	3
San Mateo	107	82	6	50.0%	71,192	6.0	4	1	4	0	0	4
San Marcos	99	71	1	70.0%	70,337	4.0	2	1	2	0	0	2
Sacramento	106	87	14	8.6%	69,478	11.9	28	1	28	0	0	1
Mission Viejo	103	75	3	70.0%	68,851	4.0	2	1	2	0	0	2
Fairfield	99	78	5	60.0%	68,447	5.0	2	1	2	0	0	2
Santa Barbara	101	74	7	50.0%	67,942	6.0	7	1	7	0	0	7
Indio	99	61	3	70.0%	67,264	4.0	2	1	2	0	0	2
San Leandro	94	52	4	60.0%	66,712	5.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
Bakersfield	105	83	10	11.9%	66,650	10.6	11	2	22	0	0	2
South Gate	92	46	4	70.0%	66,572	4.0	1	2	2	0	0	2
Antioch	101	52	3	60.0%	66,433	5.0	2	1	2	0	0	2
Tracy	109	84	4	55.3%	64,730	5.3	4	1	4	0	0	4
Temecula	99	81	6	49.5%	64,297	6.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
Vacaville	92	51	4	60.0%	63,178	5.0	2	1	2	0	0	2
Ventura	100	73	4	53.5%	62,065	6.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
Vista	108	85	5	51.4%	61,636	5.7	3	1	3	0	0	3
North Hollywood	104	67	7	40.0%	61,252	7.0	4	3	8	0	0	8
Costa Mesa	101	76	5	53.3%	60,664	5.5	2	1	2	0	0	2
Victorville	99	69	5	44.3%	60,344	6.7	3	1	3	0	0	3
Torrance	107	86	5	32.7%	57,876	7.8	5	2	10	0	0	10
Chico	99	69	4	50.0%	56,008	6.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
Inglewood	110	63	7	40.0%	53,520	7.0	5	3	10	0	0	10
Hemet	101	64	6	41.4%	53,313	7.0	3	3	5	0	0	5
Rialto	108	73	6	50.0%	53,292	6.0	2	2	4	0	0	4
Burbank	107	81	4	48.5%	52,410	6.4	5	1	5	0	0	5
Simi Valley	103	73	7	40.0%	51,485	7.0	2	1	2	0	0	2
Escondido	98	72	8	26.8%	48,215	8.3	4	1	4	0	0	4
Chino	101	72	5	50.0%	47,237	6.0	2	2	4	0	0	4
Redwood City	119	87	6	40.0%	45,785	7.0	4	1	4	0	0	4
West Covina	101	77	7	40.0%	43,763	7.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
Vallejo	103	51	6	34.4%	42,873	7.8	4	3	7	0	0	7
Hesperia	93	48	6	40.0%	41,524	7.0	2	2	4	0	0	4
Merced	100	47	6	40.0%	41,224	7.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
Carlsbad	100	81	6	36.0%	40,885	7.3	4	2	8	0	0	8
Daly City	94	46	5	35.7%	40,809	7.5	2	2	4	0	0	4
Huntington Beach	103	82	11	20.0%	39,981	9.0	4	2	8	0	0	8
Livermore	95	45	6	40.0%	38,501	7.0	2	1	2	0	0	2
Concord	103	84	7	29.5%	38,429	8.0	4	2	8	0	0	8
Santa Monica	108	93	5	40.0%	37,764	7.0	5	1	5	0	0	5
Palo Alto	104	78	11	30.0%	29,004	8.0	4	1	4	0	0	4
Santa Cruz	105	73	8	20.0%	20,810	9.0	4	1	4	0	0	4
Napa	99	58	9	20.0%	19,333	9.0	2	1	2	0	0	2
Pasadena	108	83	14	8.2%	12,902	11.8	6	1	6	0	0	0
Riverside	105	90	21	3.2%	11,926	17.0	7	2	14	0	0	0
Norwalk	101	70	12	8.0%	8,471	12.0	1	1	1	0	0	0
Santa Rosa	100	85	16	2.0%	4,321	18.0	6	1	6	0	0	0
Irvine	104	84	26	1.1%	2,930	19.6	9	2	11	0	0	0
Murrieta	104	79	16	2.0%	2,645	18.0	2	2	4	0	0	0

Brooklyn

ZIP	findlaw.com	howardgreenberglaw.com	hg.org	usnews.com	levitskylawfirm.com	nypersonalinjurylawyer.com
11208	4	1	5	6	8	10
11206	4	1	5	6	8	9
11239	1	4	2	3	5	7
11229	4	7	5	6	8	3
11226	4	2	5	6	8	10
11218	4	2	5	6	8	10
11216	4	1	5	6	8	10
11228	4	7	5	6	8	10
11238	1	4	2	3	5	7
11237	4	2	5	6	8	10
11217	4	1	5	6	8	10
11207	4	2	5	6	8	10
11236	4	1	5	6	8	3
11205	4	1	5	6	8	10
11219	4	3	5	6	8	10
11234	4	3	5	6	8	2
11203	4	1	5	6	8	3
11224	4	7	5	6	1	10
11225	4	1	5	6	8	10
11215	4	1	5	6	8	10
11233	1	4	2	3	5	7
11211	4	2	5	6	8	10
11220	4	1	5	6	8	10
11230	4	7	5	6	8	1
11232	4	2	5	6	8	10
11201	4	1	5	6	8	10
11212	4	1	5	6	8	10
11221	4	1	5	6	8	10
11210	4	7	5	6	8	2
11214	4	7	5	6	8	10
11213	4	1	5	6	8	10
11223	1	4	2	3	5	7
11235	1	4	2	3	5	7
11204	1	4	2	3	5	7
11222	4	1	5	6	8	10
11209	1	4	2	3	5	7
11231	4	1	5	6	8	10

Local Competitors

RAW Rankings

Turn This Data Into an Unfair Advantage for Findlaw

Business Intelligence Powered by Local Data

With 100% coverage in the US (32,654 zip-codes) and reporting at the city, state, and national level, you are now equipped to act on relevant business insights instead of average, interpolated, extrapolated, sampled, estimated, and other forms of unreliable data.

Market size
Revenue forecasts
Better business goals

Local, Regional, and National Competitive Landscape

Sales happen locally. In real zip-codes and neighborhoods, not in "states" or in "regions". To help you win local markets and discover opportunities that others miss, we monitor ALL your 94,908 competitors, from EVERY zip-code in USA, no matter how big or small they are.

Benchmark against ANY competitor
Discover trends & emerging players
Identify threats & opportunities

Custom Marketing Plans & Smarter Budgeting

Proprietary population-based metrics such as Visibility or Reach will help you spot business opportunities instantly. Maximize ROI by tailoring your strategy to local target markets, prioritizing and mobilizing resources where they are going to make the most impact.

A/B testing for success strategies
PPC intelligence & lower Google Ads spend
Track progress & organic intelligence

Market Segmentation & Demographic Data-Enrichment

A complete demographic profile of your market, with different levels of granularity (zip-code, city, region, etc.), allows for hyper-personalized communication and marketing campaigns. Monitor competitors, listen to communities and make your business stand out and be a part of the future.

Blend into local communities
Stimulate "in-house" competition
Improve company morale

Our Customers Love This Data, as Will You

Having a tool like this has been a gamechanger!

Knowing exactly where we rank and where the opportunities lie has helped inform action and growth.

Highly recommend SEOlium!

Alex P.

PM, WriteMaps, NZ

As a serious, enterprise-level ecom SEO, I have used EVERY rank tracking tool there is. Sadly, they are mostly all the same, and very unreliable. SEOlium is unique and powerful, and provides truly actionable intelligence, not the same old features you find everywhere. SEOlium is a must-have tool if you’re a serious SEO. Period.

Marty Marion

CEO, Master Positioning, LLC

SEOlium is more than just your average rank tracking tool. The owner goes out of his way to bring features not easily found in the market.
In addition to your standard rank tracking function, you can enjoy its market share and Bulk Import From Google Search Console feature.

Steven Kang

SEO Signals Lab

SEOlium opened my eyes to what is possible.

I now have a clearer picture and they guided me through what I needed to do.

The results have been amazing. Thank you guys.

Adrian Teasdale

CEO, Competitor Monitor, UK

Purchase Options, 30 Days Money Back Guarantee

One-Time Payment

$1,000

Findlaw Data (32,654 zip-codes)

1 keyword (law firm near me)

National/State Overview

City Overview (50 cities)

National/Regional Competitors

Local Competitors

Track Progress (Monthly Reports)

Organic Intelligence

Google Ads Intelligence

Brand Mention Alerts

SERP Domain Emails

Custom Data Filtering & Processing

RAW SQL Database Export

Custom Dashboards

Account Manager

Rising Star

$5,000/mo

Findlaw Data (32,654 zip-codes)

10 Keywords (to be agreed)

National/State Overview

City Overview (1,500 Cities)

National/Regional Competitors

Local Competitors

Track Progress (Monthly Reports)

Organic Intelligence

Google Ads Intelligence

5 Brand Mention Alerts

SERP Domain Emails

Custom Data Filtering & Processing

RAW SQL Database Export

Custom Dashboards

Account Manager

Market Dominator

$10,000/mo

Findlaw Data (32,654 zip-codes)

25 Keywords (to be agreed)

National/State/County Overview

City Overview (25,000+ Cities)

National/Regional Competitors

Local Competitors

Track Progress (Monthly Reports)

Organic Intelligence

Google Ads Intelligence

10 Brand Mention Alerts

SERP Domain Emails

Custom Data Filtering & Processing

RAW SQL Database Export

Custom Dashboards

Account Manager

Findlaw Market Research15 KPIs for Every City & State Delivered Monthly