Skip to content
For ResidentsFor Business Owners
Purpose-built comparison

Real Estate Attorney in St. Cloud, MN

This market was created from the customer's normalized search intent. Google discovery uses the intent-aware query; the published NextDoorScore score still uses the existing methodology.

Search captured: Real Estate Attorney in St. Cloud, MN

Listing names, ratings, and addresses shown for this comparison are from Google, refreshed when needed. SEOuP stores Place IDs and its own observations, not a permanent copy of Google listings. Observed search: “Real Estate Attorney in St. Cloud, MN”.

Real Estate Attorneys in St. Cloud, MN — compared by Google rating, reviews & local visibility

Real competitive search intelligence benchmark for real estate attorneys providers in St. Cloud, MN. Evaluates observable local visibility, technical website health, service content depth, and customer reputation derived from actual NextDoorScore observations.

🏢 20 Providers Analyzed🎯 Market Median Score: 66/100⭐ Median Reviews: 22.5📡 592 Attributable Measurements
Sort Comparison By:

City map view · St. Cloud, MN

These are the businesses in this comparison, placed on their real coordinates. Top comparison businesses stay labeled. Geographic position is location only — it is not a score.

Marker Legend
Top comparison businesses
Other businesses
3Clustered businesses
Mapped businesses: 20
Labels show comparison position, not a new score. Geographic position is location only.
20 mapped businesses shown.

Top 4 side by side

Observed Google position for this search. Individual quotes appear only when Google Places returned review text. Listing names, ratings, and addresses shown for this comparison are from Google, refreshed when needed. SEOuP stores Place IDs and its own observations, not a permanent copy of Google listings.

The rest of this comparison

Open NextDoorScore factor analysis for every listing
#1
Unrated(0 Google listing reviews)
70.52 / 100
Overall NextDoorScore Score
Observable digital search authority benchmark
Vs Market Median: +4.52 points
Market Position: 80.77th percentile
Local Visibility
100
+28.75 vs market median
Technical SEO
83.33
0 vs market median
Content Coverage
25
0 vs market median
Review Volume
0
+14.5 vs median (22.5)
Strongest Observed Advantage
Local Visibility: +28.75 above market median (100 vs 71.25)[1][2]
Largest Observed Gap
No major trailing factors observed
Rinke Noonan was observed at position #1 for the "Real Estate Attorney in St. Cloud, MN" search during SEOuP's September 29, 2026 observation.
Why This Business Differs Online

Rinke Noonan is 28.75 points above the measured market median for local visibility (100 versus 71.25). Observed review volume is 37 versus a market median of 22.5; this is a volume comparison, not a service-quality assessment. First measured action: Add accessible business contact information.[1][2][3]

Largest Observable Opportunity: Add accessible business contact information[1][2]
72.18 / 100
Overall NextDoorScore Score
Observable digital search authority benchmark
Vs Market Median: +6.18 points
Market Position: 96.15th percentile
Local Visibility
97.5
+26.25 vs market median
Technical SEO
83.33
0 vs market median
Content Coverage
25
0 vs market median
Review Volume
0
+137.5 vs median (22.5)
Strongest Observed Advantage
Local Visibility: +26.25 above market median (97.5 vs 71.25)[1][2]
Largest Observed Gap
No major trailing factors observed
Heller & Thyen, P.A. was observed at position #2 for the "Real Estate Attorney in St. Cloud, MN" search during SEOuP's September 29, 2026 observation. 1 business appeared above it in that same observation.
  1. #1 Rinke Noonan
Why This Business Differs Online

Heller & Thyen, P.A. is 26.25 points above the measured market median for local visibility (97.5 versus 71.25). Observed review volume is 160 versus a market median of 22.5; this is a volume comparison, not a service-quality assessment. First measured action: Add accessible business contact information.[1][2][3]

Largest Observable Opportunity: Add accessible business contact information[1][2]
Local Visibility
95
+23.75 vs market median
Technical SEO
Insufficient data
Insufficient data vs market median
Content Coverage
Insufficient data
Insufficient data vs market median
Review Volume
0
+13.5 vs median (22.5)
Strongest Observed Advantage
Local Visibility: +23.75 above market median (95 vs 71.25)[1][2]
Largest Observed Gap
No major trailing factors observed
Reichert Wenner, P.A. was observed at position #3 for the "Real Estate Attorney in St. Cloud, MN" search during SEOuP's September 29, 2026 observation. 2 businesses appeared above it in that same observation.
  1. #1 Rinke Noonan
  2. #2 Heller & Thyen, P.A.
Why This Business Differs Online

Reichert Wenner, P.A. is 23.75 points above the measured market median for local visibility (95 versus 71.25). Observed review volume is 36 versus a market median of 22.5; this is a volume comparison, not a service-quality assessment.[1][2][3]

67.83 / 100
Overall NextDoorScore Score
Observable digital search authority benchmark
Vs Market Median: +1.83 points
Market Position: 65.38th percentile
Local Visibility
92.5
+21.25 vs market median
Technical SEO
100
+16.67 vs market median
Content Coverage
0
-25 vs market median
Review Volume
0
+15.5 vs median (22.5)
Strongest Observed Advantage
Local Visibility: +21.25 above market median (92.5 vs 71.25)[1][2]
Largest Observed Gap
Content Coverage: -25 below market median (0 vs 25)[1][2]
Quinlivan & Hughes, P.A. was observed at position #4 for the "Real Estate Attorney in St. Cloud, MN" search during SEOuP's September 29, 2026 observation. 3 businesses appeared above it in that same observation.
  1. #1 Rinke Noonan
  2. #2 Heller & Thyen, P.A.
  3. #3 Reichert Wenner, P.A.
Why This Business Differs Online

Quinlivan & Hughes, P.A. is 21.25 points above the measured market median for local visibility (92.5 versus 71.25). Its content coverage score is 25 points below the measured market median (0 versus 25). Observed review volume is 38 versus a market median of 22.5; this is a volume comparison, not a service-quality assessment. First measured action: Answer relevant service questions missing from the sampled content.[1][2][3]

Largest Observable Opportunity: Answer relevant service questions missing from the sampled content[1][2]
Local Visibility
90
+18.75 vs market median
Technical SEO
Insufficient data
Insufficient data vs market median
Content Coverage
Insufficient data
Insufficient data vs market median
Review Volume
0
+19.5 vs median (22.5)
Strongest Observed Advantage
Local Visibility: +18.75 above market median (90 vs 71.25)[1][2]
Largest Observed Gap
Reviews: -0.58 below market median (66.22 vs 66.8)[1][2]
Evenson Decker, P.A. was observed at position #5 for the "Real Estate Attorney in St. Cloud, MN" search during SEOuP's September 29, 2026 observation. 4 businesses appeared above it in that same observation.
  1. #1 Rinke Noonan
  2. #2 Heller & Thyen, P.A.
  3. #3 Reichert Wenner, P.A.
  4. #4 Quinlivan & Hughes, P.A.
Why This Business Differs Online

Evenson Decker, P.A. is 18.75 points above the measured market median for local visibility (90 versus 71.25). Its reviews score is 0.58 points below the measured market median (66.22 versus 66.8). Observed review volume is 42 versus a market median of 22.5; this is a volume comparison, not a service-quality assessment.[1][2][3]

Local Visibility
75
+3.75 vs market median
Technical SEO
Insufficient data
Insufficient data vs market median
Content Coverage
Insufficient data
Insufficient data vs market median
Review Volume
0
+54.5 vs median (22.5)
Strongest Observed Advantage
Local Visibility: +3.75 above market median (75 vs 71.25)[1][2]
Largest Observed Gap
Reviews: -0.27 below market median (66.53 vs 66.8)[1][2]
Kelm & Reuter, P.A. was observed at position #6 for the "Real Estate Attorney in St. Cloud, MN" search during SEOuP's September 29, 2026 observation. 5 businesses appeared above it in that same observation.
  1. #1 Rinke Noonan
  2. #2 Heller & Thyen, P.A.
  3. #3 Reichert Wenner, P.A.
  4. #4 Quinlivan & Hughes, P.A.
  5. #5 Evenson Decker, P.A.
Why This Business Differs Online

Kelm & Reuter, P.A. is 3.75 points above the measured market median for local visibility (75 versus 71.25). Its reviews score is 0.27 points below the measured market median (66.53 versus 66.8). Observed review volume is 77 versus a market median of 22.5; this is a volume comparison, not a service-quality assessment.[1][2][3]

67.31 / 100
Overall NextDoorScore Score
Observable digital search authority benchmark
Vs Market Median: +1.31 points
Market Position: 57.69th percentile
Local Visibility
70
-1.25 vs market median
Technical SEO
83.33
0 vs market median
Content Coverage
50
+25 vs market median
Review Volume
0
-11.5 vs median (22.5)
Strongest Observed Advantage
Content Coverage: +25 above market median (50 vs 25)[1][2]
Largest Observed Gap
Reviews: -5.81 below market median (60.99 vs 66.8)[1][2]
River Valley Law PA was observed at position #7 for the "Real Estate Attorney in St. Cloud, MN" search during SEOuP's September 29, 2026 observation. 6 businesses appeared above it in that same observation.
  1. #1 Rinke Noonan
  2. #2 Heller & Thyen, P.A.
  3. #3 Reichert Wenner, P.A.
  4. #4 Quinlivan & Hughes, P.A.
  5. #5 Evenson Decker, P.A.
  6. #6 Kelm & Reuter, P.A.
Why This Business Differs Online

River Valley Law PA is 25 points above the measured market median for content coverage (50 versus 25). Its reviews score is 5.81 points below the measured market median (60.99 versus 66.8). Observed review volume is 11 versus a market median of 22.5; this is a volume comparison, not a service-quality assessment. First measured action: Review the public review-volume gap relative to this market.[1][2][3]

Largest Observable Opportunity: Review the public review-volume gap relative to this market[1][2]
Local Visibility
82.5
+11.25 vs market median
Technical SEO
Insufficient data
Insufficient data vs market median
Content Coverage
Insufficient data
Insufficient data vs market median
Review Volume
0
+5.5 vs median (22.5)
Strongest Observed Advantage
Local Visibility: +11.25 above market median (82.5 vs 71.25)[1][2]
Largest Observed Gap
No major trailing factors observed
Sam V. Calvert Attorney at Law was observed at position #8 for the "Real Estate Attorney in St. Cloud, MN" search during SEOuP's September 29, 2026 observation. 7 businesses appeared above it in that same observation.
  1. #1 Rinke Noonan
  2. #2 Heller & Thyen, P.A.
  3. #3 Reichert Wenner, P.A.
  4. #4 Quinlivan & Hughes, P.A.
  5. #5 Evenson Decker, P.A.
  6. #6 Kelm & Reuter, P.A.
  7. #7 River Valley Law PA
Why This Business Differs Online

Sam V. Calvert Attorney at Law is 11.25 points above the measured market median for local visibility (82.5 versus 71.25). Observed review volume is 28 versus a market median of 22.5; this is a volume comparison, not a service-quality assessment. First measured action: Review the measured local-search visibility gap.[1][2][3]

Largest Observable Opportunity: Review the measured local-search visibility gap[1][2]
58.05 / 100
Overall NextDoorScore Score
Observable digital search authority benchmark
Vs Market Median: -7.95 points
Market Position: 34.62th percentile
Local Visibility
80
+8.75 vs market median
Technical SEO
100
+16.67 vs market median
Content Coverage
0
-25 vs market median
Review Volume
0
-19.5 vs median (22.5)
Strongest Observed Advantage
Technical SEO: +16.67 above market median (100 vs 83.33)[1][2]
Largest Observed Gap
Entity Consistency: -33.33 below market median (0 vs 33.33)[1][2]
Hanson Law Office PA was observed at position #9 for the "Real Estate Attorney in St. Cloud, MN" search during SEOuP's September 29, 2026 observation. 8 businesses appeared above it in that same observation.
  1. #1 Rinke Noonan
  2. #2 Heller & Thyen, P.A.
  3. #3 Reichert Wenner, P.A.
  4. #4 Quinlivan & Hughes, P.A.
  5. #5 Evenson Decker, P.A.
  6. #6 Kelm & Reuter, P.A.
  7. #7 River Valley Law PA
  8. #8 Sam V. Calvert Attorney at Law
Why This Business Differs Online

Hanson Law Office PA is 16.67 points above the measured market median for technical seo (100 versus 83.33). Its entity consistency score is 33.33 points below the measured market median (0 versus 33.33). Observed review volume is 3 versus a market median of 22.5; this is a volume comparison, not a service-quality assessment. First measured action: Add accessible business contact information.[1][2][3]

Largest Observable Opportunity: Add accessible business contact information[1][2]
36.06 / 100
Overall NextDoorScore Score
Observable digital search authority benchmark
Vs Market Median: -29.94 points
Market Position: 3.85th percentile
Local Visibility
55
-16.25 vs market median
Technical SEO
0
-83.33 vs market median
Content Coverage
0
-25 vs market median
Review Volume
0
-7.5 vs median (22.5)
Strongest Observed Advantage
Reviews: +0.27 above market median (67.07 vs 66.8)[1][2]
Largest Observed Gap
Technical SEO: -83.33 below market median (0 vs 83.33)[1][2]
Revermann Lund Ross was observed at position #10 for the "Real Estate Attorney in St. Cloud, MN" search during SEOuP's September 29, 2026 observation. 9 businesses appeared above it in that same observation.
  1. #1 Rinke Noonan
  2. #2 Heller & Thyen, P.A.
  3. #3 Reichert Wenner, P.A.
  4. #4 Quinlivan & Hughes, P.A.
  5. #5 Evenson Decker, P.A.
  6. #6 Kelm & Reuter, P.A.
  7. #7 River Valley Law PA
  8. #8 Sam V. Calvert Attorney at Law
  9. #9 Hanson Law Office PA
Why This Business Differs Online

Revermann Lund Ross is 0.27 points above the measured market median for reviews (67.07 versus 66.8). Its technical seo score is 83.33 points below the measured market median (0 versus 83.33). Observed review volume is 15 versus a market median of 22.5; this is a volume comparison, not a service-quality assessment. First measured action: Review missing canonical tags on sampled pages.[1][2][3]

Largest Observable Opportunity: Review missing canonical tags on sampled pages[1][2]
Local Visibility
75
+3.75 vs market median
Technical SEO
Insufficient data
Insufficient data vs market median
Content Coverage
Insufficient data
Insufficient data vs market median
Review Volume
0
-12.5 vs median (22.5)
Strongest Observed Advantage
Local Visibility: +3.75 above market median (75 vs 71.25)[1][2]
Largest Observed Gap
Reviews: -2.44 below market median (64.36 vs 66.8)[1][2]
Lathrop GPM LLP was observed at position #11 for the "Real Estate Attorney in St. Cloud, MN" search during SEOuP's September 29, 2026 observation. 10 businesses appeared above it in that same observation.
  1. #1 Rinke Noonan
  2. #2 Heller & Thyen, P.A.
  3. #3 Reichert Wenner, P.A.
  4. #4 Quinlivan & Hughes, P.A.
  5. #5 Evenson Decker, P.A.
  6. #6 Kelm & Reuter, P.A.
  7. #7 River Valley Law PA
  8. #8 Sam V. Calvert Attorney at Law
  9. #9 Hanson Law Office PA
  10. #10 Revermann Lund Ross
Why This Business Differs Online

Lathrop GPM LLP is 3.75 points above the measured market median for local visibility (75 versus 71.25). Its reviews score is 2.44 points below the measured market median (64.36 versus 66.8). Observed review volume is 10 versus a market median of 22.5; this is a volume comparison, not a service-quality assessment. First measured action: Review the public review-volume gap relative to this market.[1][2][3]

Largest Observable Opportunity: Review the public review-volume gap relative to this market[1][2]
70.36 / 100
Overall NextDoorScore Score
Observable digital search authority benchmark
Vs Market Median: +4.36 points
Market Position: 73.08th percentile
Local Visibility
72.5
+1.25 vs market median
Technical SEO
100
+16.67 vs market median
Content Coverage
25
0 vs market median
Review Volume
0
-16.5 vs median (22.5)
Strongest Observed Advantage
Entity Consistency: +16.67 above market median (50 vs 33.33)[1][2]
Largest Observed Gap
Reviews: -2.72 below market median (64.08 vs 66.8)[1][2]
Sandahl & Damhof was observed at position #12 for the "Real Estate Attorney in St. Cloud, MN" search during SEOuP's September 29, 2026 observation. 11 businesses appeared above it in that same observation.
  1. #1 Rinke Noonan
  2. #2 Heller & Thyen, P.A.
  3. #3 Reichert Wenner, P.A.
  4. #4 Quinlivan & Hughes, P.A.
  5. #5 Evenson Decker, P.A.
  6. #6 Kelm & Reuter, P.A.
  7. #7 River Valley Law PA
  8. #8 Sam V. Calvert Attorney at Law
  9. #9 Hanson Law Office PA
  10. #10 Revermann Lund Ross
  11. #11 Lathrop GPM LLP
Why This Business Differs Online

Sandahl & Damhof is 16.67 points above the measured market median for entity consistency (50 versus 33.33). Its reviews score is 2.72 points below the measured market median (64.08 versus 66.8). Observed review volume is 6 versus a market median of 22.5; this is a volume comparison, not a service-quality assessment. First measured action: Review the public review-volume gap relative to this market.[1][2][3]

Largest Observable Opportunity: Review the public review-volume gap relative to this market[1][2]
66 / 100
Overall NextDoorScore Score
Observable digital search authority benchmark
Vs Market Median: 0 points
Market Position: 50th percentile
Local Visibility
70
-1.25 vs market median
Technical SEO
100
+16.67 vs market median
Content Coverage
25
0 vs market median
Review Volume
0
-21.5 vs median (22.5)
Strongest Observed Advantage
Technical SEO: +16.67 above market median (100 vs 83.33)[1][2]
Largest Observed Gap
Reviews: -11.78 below market median (55.02 vs 66.8)[1][2]
Paul Jeddeloh Attorney was observed at position #13 for the "Real Estate Attorney in St. Cloud, MN" search during SEOuP's September 29, 2026 observation. 12 businesses appeared above it in that same observation.
  1. #1 Rinke Noonan
  2. #2 Heller & Thyen, P.A.
  3. #3 Reichert Wenner, P.A.
  4. #4 Quinlivan & Hughes, P.A.
  5. #5 Evenson Decker, P.A.
  6. #6 Kelm & Reuter, P.A.
  7. #7 River Valley Law PA
  8. #8 Sam V. Calvert Attorney at Law
  9. #9 Hanson Law Office PA
  10. #10 Revermann Lund Ross
  11. #11 Lathrop GPM LLP
  12. #12 Sandahl & Damhof
Why This Business Differs Online

Paul Jeddeloh Attorney is 16.67 points above the measured market median for technical seo (100 versus 83.33). Its reviews score is 11.78 points below the measured market median (55.02 versus 66.8). Observed review volume is 1 versus a market median of 22.5; this is a volume comparison, not a service-quality assessment. First measured action: Review the public review-volume gap relative to this market.[1][2][3]

Largest Observable Opportunity: Review the public review-volume gap relative to this market[1][2]
71.5 / 100
Overall NextDoorScore Score
Observable digital search authority benchmark
Vs Market Median: +5.5 points
Market Position: 88.46th percentile
Local Visibility
67.5
-3.75 vs market median
Technical SEO
100
+16.67 vs market median
Content Coverage
25
0 vs market median
Review Volume
0
+76.5 vs median (22.5)
Strongest Observed Advantage
Entity Consistency: +16.67 above market median (50 vs 33.33)[1][2]
Largest Observed Gap
Local Visibility: -3.75 below market median (67.5 vs 71.25)[1][2]
Jeddeloh Snyder Stommes was observed at position #14 for the "Real Estate Attorney in St. Cloud, MN" search during SEOuP's September 29, 2026 observation. 13 businesses appeared above it in that same observation.
  1. #1 Rinke Noonan
  2. #2 Heller & Thyen, P.A.
  3. #3 Reichert Wenner, P.A.
  4. #4 Quinlivan & Hughes, P.A.
  5. #5 Evenson Decker, P.A.
  6. #6 Kelm & Reuter, P.A.
  7. #7 River Valley Law PA
  8. #8 Sam V. Calvert Attorney at Law
  9. #9 Hanson Law Office PA
  10. #10 Revermann Lund Ross
  11. #11 Lathrop GPM LLP
  12. #12 Sandahl & Damhof
  13. #13 Paul Jeddeloh Attorney
Why This Business Differs Online

Jeddeloh Snyder Stommes is 16.67 points above the measured market median for entity consistency (50 versus 33.33). Its local visibility score is 3.75 points below the measured market median (67.5 versus 71.25). Observed review volume is 99 versus a market median of 22.5; this is a volume comparison, not a service-quality assessment. First measured action: Review the measured local-search visibility gap.[1][2][3]

Largest Observable Opportunity: Review the measured local-search visibility gap[1][2]
52.42 / 100
Overall NextDoorScore Score
Observable digital search authority benchmark
Vs Market Median: -13.58 points
Market Position: 26.92th percentile
Local Visibility
65
-6.25 vs market median
Technical SEO
33.33
-50 vs market median
Content Coverage
25
0 vs market median
Review Volume
0
-19.5 vs median (22.5)
Strongest Observed Advantage
Balanced with market baselines
Largest Observed Gap
Technical SEO: -50 below market median (33.33 vs 83.33)[1][2]
Why This Business Differs Online

Donohue Novak At Law's technical seo score is 50 points below the measured market median (33.33 versus 83.33). Observed review volume is 3 versus a market median of 22.5; this is a volume comparison, not a service-quality assessment. First measured action: Review missing canonical tags on sampled pages.[1][2][3]

Largest Observable Opportunity: Review missing canonical tags on sampled pages[1][2]
65.51 / 100
Overall NextDoorScore Score
Observable digital search authority benchmark
Vs Market Median: -0.49 points
Market Position: 42.31th percentile
Local Visibility
62.5
-8.75 vs market median
Technical SEO
83.33
0 vs market median
Content Coverage
0
-25 vs market median
Review Volume
0
+320.5 vs median (22.5)
Strongest Observed Advantage
Reviews: +25.48 above market median (92.28 vs 66.8)[1][2]
Largest Observed Gap
Content Coverage: -25 below market median (0 vs 25)[1][2]
Why This Business Differs Online

LifeBack Law Firm, P.A. is 25.48 points above the measured market median for reviews (92.28 versus 66.8). Its content coverage score is 25 points below the measured market median (0 versus 25). Observed review volume is 343 versus a market median of 22.5; this is a volume comparison, not a service-quality assessment. First measured action: Answer relevant service questions missing from the sampled content.[1][2][3]

Largest Observable Opportunity: Answer relevant service questions missing from the sampled content[1][2]
#17
Unrated(0 Google listing reviews)
Local Visibility
20
-51.25 vs market median
Technical SEO
Insufficient data
Insufficient data vs market median
Content Coverage
Insufficient data
Insufficient data vs market median
Review Volume
0
-5.5 vs median (22.5)
Strongest Observed Advantage
Reviews: +4.12 above market median (70.92 vs 66.8)[1][2]
Largest Observed Gap
Local Visibility: -51.25 below market median (20 vs 71.25)[1][2]
Why This Business Differs Online

Syverson PLLC is 4.12 points above the measured market median for reviews (70.92 versus 66.8). Its local visibility score is 51.25 points below the measured market median (20 versus 71.25). Observed review volume is 17 versus a market median of 22.5; this is a volume comparison, not a service-quality assessment. First measured action: Review the measured local-search visibility gap.[1][2][3]

Largest Observable Opportunity: Review the measured local-search visibility gap[1][2]
37.14 / 100
Overall NextDoorScore Score
Observable digital search authority benchmark
Vs Market Median: -28.86 points
Market Position: 19.23th percentile
Local Visibility
15
-56.25 vs market median
Technical SEO
50
-33.33 vs market median
Content Coverage
0
-25 vs market median
Review Volume
0
-14.5 vs median (22.5)
Strongest Observed Advantage
Balanced with market baselines
Largest Observed Gap
Local Visibility: -56.25 below market median (15 vs 71.25)[1][2]
Why This Business Differs Online

Lund Ross, P.A. Law Firm's local visibility score is 56.25 points below the measured market median (15 versus 71.25). Observed review volume is 8 versus a market median of 22.5; this is a volume comparison, not a service-quality assessment. First measured action: Review the measured local-search visibility gap.[1][2][3]

Largest Observable Opportunity: Review the measured local-search visibility gap[1][2]
#19
Unrated(0 Google listing reviews)
36.43 / 100
Overall NextDoorScore Score
Observable digital search authority benchmark
Vs Market Median: -29.57 points
Market Position: 11.54th percentile
Local Visibility
55
-16.25 vs market median
Technical SEO
0
-83.33 vs market median
Content Coverage
0
-25 vs market median
Review Volume
0
+10.5 vs median (22.5)
Strongest Observed Advantage
Reviews: +2.72 above market median (69.52 vs 66.8)[1][2]
Largest Observed Gap
Technical SEO: -83.33 below market median (0 vs 83.33)[1][2]
Why This Business Differs Online

PCG Law is 2.72 points above the measured market median for reviews (69.52 versus 66.8). Its technical seo score is 83.33 points below the measured market median (0 versus 83.33). Observed review volume is 33 versus a market median of 22.5; this is a volume comparison, not a service-quality assessment. First measured action: Review missing canonical tags on sampled pages.[1][2][3]

Largest Observable Opportunity: Review missing canonical tags on sampled pages[1][2]
#20
Unrated(0 Google listing reviews)
Local Visibility
52.5
-18.75 vs market median
Technical SEO
Insufficient data
Insufficient data vs market median
Content Coverage
Insufficient data
Insufficient data vs market median
Review Volume
0
-13.5 vs median (22.5)
Strongest Observed Advantage
Balanced with market baselines
Largest Observed Gap
Local Visibility: -18.75 below market median (52.5 vs 71.25)[1][2]
Why This Business Differs Online

RGP Law Ltd.'s local visibility score is 18.75 points below the measured market median (52.5 versus 71.25). Observed review volume is 9 versus a market median of 22.5; this is a volume comparison, not a service-quality assessment. First measured action: Review the measured local-search visibility gap.[1][2][3]

Largest Observable Opportunity: Review the measured local-search visibility gap[1][2]

Who Has the Advantage? Factor Leaderboards

Independent rankings for each measured search factor within this snapshot. Ranks reflect observable digital data, not an endorsement.

Service × Location Content Detection Matrix

Observed coverage of essential service and location content on sampled official websites.

Detected Content CheckDonohue Novak At LawHanson Law Office PASam V. Calvert Attorney at LawRinke NoonanLund Ross, P.A. Law FirmJeddeloh Snyder StommesQuinlivan & Hughes, P.A.Reichert Wenner, P.A.Lathrop GPM LLPKelm & Reuter, P.A.RGP Law Ltd.Sandahl & DamhofRiver Valley Law PARevermann Lund RossLifeBack Law Firm, P.A.Evenson Decker, P.A.Heller & Thyen, P.A.PCG LawSyverson PLLCPaul Jeddeloh Attorney
Service content
13 measured
✗ Not detected[1]✗ Not detected[1]—✗ Not detected[1]✗ Not detected[1]✗ Not detected[1]✗ Not detected[1]————✗ Not detected[1]✗ Not detected[1]✗ Not detected[1]✗ Not detected[1]—✗ Not detected[1]✗ Not detected[1]—✗ Not detected[1]
Location content
13 measured
✓ Detected[1]✗ Not detected[1]—✓ Detected[1]✗ Not detected[1]✓ Detected[1]✗ Not detected[1]————✓ Detected[1]✓ Detected[1]✗ Not detected[1]✗ Not detected[1]—✓ Detected[1]✗ Not detected[1]—✓ Detected[1]
Service and location coverage
13 measured
✗ Not detected[1]✗ Not detected[1]—✗ Not detected[1]✗ Not detected[1]✗ Not detected[1]✗ Not detected[1]————✗ Not detected[1]✗ Not detected[1]✗ Not detected[1]✗ Not detected[1]—✗ Not detected[1]✗ Not detected[1]—✗ Not detected[1]
Relevant FAQs
13 measured
✗ Not detected[1]✗ Not detected[1]—✗ Not detected[1]✗ Not detected[1]✗ Not detected[1]✗ Not detected[1]————✗ Not detected[1]✓ Detected[1]✗ Not detected[1]✗ Not detected[1]—✗ Not detected[1]✗ Not detected[1]—✗ Not detected[1]

Snapshot Provenance & Methodology Disclosure

Snapshot ID: 2118b144-fabc-4b72-ade0-cf954f27e053 · Scoring Cutoff (asOf): 2026-09-29 02:06 UTC · Published: 2026-09-29 02:06 UTC · Methodology Version: 1.1.0

This comparison is a published, immutable snapshot. Scores evaluate observable digital search signals (local visibility, website accessibility, service content, and reviews) and do not evaluate physical craftsmanship, licensing, or safety.

View Full Methodology Weights & Scoring Rules
Methodology Factor Weights:
  • Local Visibility (20%): Verified local-search position and explicitly observed category, location, and service-area relevance.
  • Local Profile (15%): Measured completeness of public local-profile information.
  • Reviews (15%): Observed public rating, review volume, and review recency when measured.
  • Technical SEO (20%): Explicitly measured website accessibility, metadata, indexability, and technical checks.
  • Content Coverage (15%): Detected relevant service, local, and supporting content within the sampled website.
  • Entity Consistency (15%): Explicit cross-source consistency checks and detected business identity information.
Scoring Rules:
  • Scores describe observable digital signals, not workmanship, customer service, licensing, safety, or business quality.
  • Each factor is the arithmetic mean of its measured signals on a 0–100 scale. Signal coverage is shown separately; absent or unavailable signals are never zeroes.
  • The overall score is the weighted mean of all six factors and is unavailable until every factor has at least one measured signal. Factor coverage can differ across businesses.
  • Only attributable observations at or before the fixed asOf date, no more than 90 days old, and not expired at asOf are scored. The latest observation for a signal controls its availability.
  • Boolean checks score 100 for true and 0 for false. Rating scores rating / 5 × 100. Review volume scores min(100, log10(count + 1) / 3 × 100), a disclosed saturation benchmark of 999 reviews, not a quality assessment.
  • Review recency scores exp(-days / 180) × 100. Verified local-search rank scores max(0, 1 - (rank - 1) / 20) × 100; discovery-list order is never a search rank.
  • Measured percentages are used directly. Broken-link count scores 100 only for an explicitly measured zero, otherwise 0. Scores and statistics round to two decimals.
  • Market statistics exclude unavailable values. Midrank percentile = 100 × (number below + half the number tied) / measured sample size; an all-tied sample is at the 50th percentile.
  • Opportunities describe measured gaps, not estimated traffic or revenue. Missing observations never create an opportunity. Raw observations, source references, and dates remain visible.
  • Observed Google position is the 1-based order returned by the configured Google Places text search for a specific query, location, and observation time. It is not a universal or permanent Google rank. SEOuP stores Place IDs and its own audit observations; Google listing fields are a short-lived display cache with required attribution.

Related services in St. Cloud

All real estate attorneys comparisons · All local comparisons · How scores work · Own one of these businesses? Claim your free listing