← All Ohio markets
Competitive Analysis — Cincinnati DMA · YTD

Cincinnati Market Competitive Analysis

8 firms make up the local and regional legal-advertising field in Cincinnati, OH year-to-date, running roughly 91% Broadcast / 2% vMVPD / 7% CTV. This view measures delivered viewing volume.

Market Impressions
544M
8-firm competitive set · YTD
Firms Tracked
8
Cincinnati · YTD
Streaming Share
28%
245M · of full-market delivery
Market Leader
Morgan & Morgan
367M · 68% share of voice
Competitive Landscape

Who's running — and where

Across Cincinnati, OH, 83 legal advertisers were detected delivering in market year-to-date — the vast majority national connected-TV spilling into the DMA. The local and regional competitive set of 8 firms delivered 544M impressions year-to-date, running roughly 91% Broadcast / 2% vMVPD / 7% CTV/Streaming. The bars below contrast the full detected market with that set, by share.

Full Cincinnati Market (83 advertisers · 890M impressions) · Share of Delivery
Broadcast 69%
3%
CTV 28%
Broadcast 617M · vMVPD 29M · CTV 245M
Cincinnati Competitive Set (8 firms · 544M impressions) · Share of Delivery
Broadcast 91%
2%
CTV 7%
Broadcast 493M · vMVPD 11M · CTV 40M
Broadcast (local stations & cable)
vMVPD (live-TV streaming bundles)
CTV / Streaming (true OTT apps)
Delivered Impressions by Channel (YTD)
#FirmShare of Voice
of competitive set
Total Impressions
delivered · YTD
Channel MixBroadcast %vMVPD %CTV %
Majors
1Morgan & Morgan Injury Law Firm67.5%367M
90%2%8%
2Postman Law16.4%89M
93%1%6%
3Law Offices of Blake R Maislin8.8%48M
97%1%2%
4Young, Reverman & Bolotin3.4%19M
94%1%5%
5Elk & Elk2.2%12M
82%7%11%
Mid-Pack
6Richman Law Offices0.6%3.3M
98%1%1%
7Dyer, Garofalo, Mann & Schultz0.5%2.8M
69%16%15%
8John Foy & Associates0.5%2.7M
74%2%24%

Share of Voice is each firm's share of the 8-firm competitive set shown here — not the full market.

Publisher Intelligence

Share of voice — who owns what

Share of voice across the competitive set — the 8 firms competing in Cincinnati year-to-date, by publisher.

Publisher Volume — Impressions (YTD)
Competitor Share of Voice by Publisher Each firm's share of the competitive set's impressions on that publisher.
Firms: Morgan & MorganPostman LawLaw Offices of Blake R MaislinYoung, Reverman & BolotinElk & ElkRichman Law OfficesDyer, Garofalo, Mann & SchultzJohn Foy & Associates

Ranked competitor detail by publisher

Each card is one publisher. Top 5 advertisers ranked by SOV on that publisher. Click Show all to expand to every competitor in the set with measurable impressions.

WKRC
Broadcast
137M impressions · 25% of set · 8 of 8 active
  1. 1
    Morgan & Morgan
    112M
    82.2%
  2. 2
    Postman Law
    16M
    11.8%
  3. 3
    Elk & Elk
    4.2M
    3.1%
  4. 4
    Law Offices of Blake R Maislin
    1.5M
    1.1%
  5. 5
    Dyer, Garofalo, Mann & Schultz
    721K
    0.5%
Show all 8 analyzed competitors
  1. 6
    Young, Reverman & Bolotin
    672K
    0.5%
  2. 7
    Richman Law Offices
    640K
    0.5%
  3. 8
    John Foy & Associates
    554K
    0.4%
WXIX
Broadcast
136M impressions · 25% of set · 7 of 8 active
  1. 1
    Morgan & Morgan
    60M
    43.9%
  2. 2
    Law Offices of Blake R Maislin
    38M
    27.6%
  3. 3
    Postman Law
    29M
    21.5%
  4. 4
    Young, Reverman & Bolotin
    7.1M
    5.2%
  5. 5
    John Foy & Associates
    1.3M
    1.0%
Show all 7 analyzed competitors
  1. 6
    Dyer, Garofalo, Mann & Schultz
    867K
    0.6%
  2. 7
    Elk & Elk
    225K
    0.2%
WLWT
Broadcast
103M impressions · 19% of set · 7 of 8 active
  1. 1
    Morgan & Morgan
    89M
    86.1%
  2. 2
    Postman Law
    11M
    10.5%
  3. 3
    Young, Reverman & Bolotin
    3.3M
    3.2%
  4. 4
    Law Offices of Blake R Maislin
    69K
    0.1%
  5. 5
    Dyer, Garofalo, Mann & Schultz
    60K
    0.1%
Show all 7 analyzed competitors
  1. 6
    Elk & Elk
    53K
    0.1%
  2. 7
    John Foy & Associates
    36K
    0.0%
WCPO
Broadcast
54M impressions · 10% of set · 6 of 8 active
  1. 1
    Morgan & Morgan
    31M
    57.1%
  2. 2
    Postman Law
    14M
    26.4%
  3. 3
    Young, Reverman & Bolotin
    4.1M
    7.6%
  4. 4
    Elk & Elk
    3.9M
    7.2%
  5. 5
    Law Offices of Blake R Maislin
    819K
    1.5%
Show all 6 analyzed competitors
  1. 6
    Dyer, Garofalo, Mann & Schultz
    126K
    0.2%
WSTR
Broadcast
34M impressions · 6% of set · 8 of 8 active
  1. 1
    Morgan & Morgan
    16M
    46.8%
  2. 2
    Postman Law
    7.3M
    21.3%
  3. 3
    Law Offices of Blake R Maislin
    5.9M
    17.1%
  4. 4
    Richman Law Offices
    2.5M
    7.3%
  5. 5
    Young, Reverman & Bolotin
    2.4M
    7.0%
Show all 8 analyzed competitors
  1. 6
    John Foy & Associates
    93K
    0.3%
  2. 7
    Dyer, Garofalo, Mann & Schultz
    61K
    0.2%
  3. 8
    Elk & Elk
    6K
    0.0%
YouTube App
Streaming App
14M impressions · 2% of set · 8 of 8 active
  1. 1
    Morgan & Morgan
    12M
    90.9%
  2. 2
    Elk & Elk
    670K
    4.9%
  3. 3
    Young, Reverman & Bolotin
    223K
    1.6%
  4. 4
    John Foy & Associates
    207K
    1.5%
  5. 5
    Law Offices of Blake R Maislin
    70K
    0.5%
Show all 8 analyzed competitors
  1. 6
    Postman Law
    35K
    0.3%
  2. 7
    Dyer, Garofalo, Mann & Schultz
    27K
    0.2%
  3. 8
    Richman Law Offices
    587
    0.0%
Other App
Streaming App
7.4M impressions · 1% of set · 8 of 8 active
  1. 1
    Morgan & Morgan
    6.2M
    83.7%
  2. 2
    Postman Law
    692K
    9.4%
  3. 3
    Elk & Elk
    221K
    3.0%
  4. 4
    Dyer, Garofalo, Mann & Schultz
    106K
    1.4%
  5. 5
    Law Offices of Blake R Maislin
    101K
    1.4%
Show all 8 analyzed competitors
  1. 6
    Young, Reverman & Bolotin
    49K
    0.7%
  2. 7
    John Foy & Associates
    32K
    0.4%
  3. 8
    Richman Law Offices
    4K
    0.1%
OTA
Broadcast
6.2M impressions · 1% of set · 8 of 8 active
  1. 1
    Morgan & Morgan
    5.0M
    80.7%
  2. 2
    Postman Law
    715K
    11.5%
  3. 3
    Law Offices of Blake R Maislin
    294K
    4.8%
  4. 4
    Young, Reverman & Bolotin
    79K
    1.3%
  5. 5
    Richman Law Offices
    51K
    0.8%
Show all 8 analyzed competitors
  1. 6
    Elk & Elk
    39K
    0.6%
  2. 7
    John Foy & Associates
    16K
    0.3%
  3. 8
    Dyer, Garofalo, Mann & Schultz
    1K
    0.0%
Tubi TV App
Streaming App
5.4M impressions · 1% of set · 7 of 8 active
  1. 1
    Postman Law
    3.8M
    70.0%
  2. 2
    Morgan & Morgan
    1.1M
    20.0%
  3. 3
    Young, Reverman & Bolotin
    436K
    8.1%
  4. 4
    John Foy & Associates
    53K
    1.0%
  5. 5
    Elk & Elk
    34K
    0.6%
Show all 7 analyzed competitors
  1. 6
    Law Offices of Blake R Maislin
    10K
    0.2%
  2. 7
    Dyer, Garofalo, Mann & Schultz
    4K
    0.1%
Spectrum Streaming
vMVPD
5.0M impressions · 1% of set · 8 of 8 active
  1. 1
    Morgan & Morgan
    3.3M
    66.5%
  2. 2
    Postman Law
    516K
    10.4%
  3. 3
    Elk & Elk
    501K
    10.1%
  4. 4
    Law Offices of Blake R Maislin
    305K
    6.1%
  5. 5
    Dyer, Garofalo, Mann & Schultz
    238K
    4.8%
Show all 8 analyzed competitors
  1. 6
    Young, Reverman & Bolotin
    56K
    1.1%
  2. 7
    John Foy & Associates
    30K
    0.6%
  3. 8
    Richman Law Offices
    21K
    0.4%
INSP
4.4M impressions · 1% of set · 1 of 8 active
  1. 1
    Morgan & Morgan
    4.4M
    100.0%
  2. 2
  3. 3
  4. 4
  5. 5
YouTube TV App
vMVPD
3.2M impressions · 1% of set · 8 of 8 active
  1. 1
    Morgan & Morgan
    2.5M
    77.8%
  2. 2
    Postman Law
    250K
    7.7%
  3. 3
    Law Offices of Blake R Maislin
    209K
    6.4%
  4. 4
    Dyer, Garofalo, Mann & Schultz
    100K
    3.1%
  5. 5
    Elk & Elk
    71K
    2.2%
Show all 8 analyzed competitors
  1. 6
    Young, Reverman & Bolotin
    64K
    2.0%
  2. 7
    John Foy & Associates
    18K
    0.5%
  3. 8
    Richman Law Offices
    10K
    0.3%
Amazon Fire
Device
3.2M impressions · 1% of set · 8 of 8 active
  1. 1
    Morgan & Morgan
    2.6M
    81.0%
  2. 2
    Postman Law
    279K
    8.7%
  3. 3
    Elk & Elk
    112K
    3.5%
  4. 4
    Law Offices of Blake R Maislin
    86K
    2.7%
  5. 5
    Dyer, Garofalo, Mann & Schultz
    58K
    1.8%
Show all 8 analyzed competitors
  1. 6
    John Foy & Associates
    49K
    1.5%
  2. 7
    Young, Reverman & Bolotin
    22K
    0.7%
  3. 8
    Richman Law Offices
    3K
    0.1%
FNC
3.0M impressions · 1% of set · 5 of 8 active
  1. 1
    Morgan & Morgan
    3.0M
    99.8%
  2. 2
    Postman Law
    2K
    0.1%
  3. 3
    Law Offices of Blake R Maislin
    2K
    0.1%
  4. 4
    John Foy & Associates
    682
    0.0%
  5. 5
    Elk & Elk
    545
    0.0%
PlayStation 5
Device
2.7M impressions · 0% of set · 8 of 8 active
  1. 1
    Morgan & Morgan
    2.4M
    89.2%
  2. 2
    John Foy & Associates
    92K
    3.4%
  3. 3
    Postman Law
    66K
    2.4%
  4. 4
    Law Offices of Blake R Maislin
    62K
    2.3%
  5. 5
    Young, Reverman & Bolotin
    29K
    1.1%
Show all 8 analyzed competitors
  1. 6
    Elk & Elk
    24K
    0.9%
  2. 7
    Dyer, Garofalo, Mann & Schultz
    17K
    0.6%
  3. 8
    Richman Law Offices
    135
    0.0%
Competitor Creative

The creative landscape

Active spots running in the Cincinnati market this period.

MMIL
Call Now
Morgan & Morgan Injury Law Firm
Personal Injury
PL
Call Now
Postman Law
Personal Injury
LOOB
Call Us
Law Offices of Blake R Maislin
Personal Injury
EE
Contact Us
Elk & Elk
Personal Injury
DGMS
Thirty Years
Dyer, Garofalo, Mann & Schultz
Personal Injury

Methodology and Definitions

1. Data Sourcing & Collection

Our platform uses Automatic Content Recognition (ACR) to capture real-time viewing data from the "glass" of over 23 million opted-in U.S. households, across a diverse panel of devices (Vizio, LG) and peripheral inputs. Each captured ad is fingerprinted and matched against a comprehensive ad library to verify when and where it aired.

A note on reading this data. These figures are drawn from a representative smart-TV panel, so they are best read as a strong directional indicator of in-market presence rather than an exact census of delivery. Channel mix and share-of-voice percentages are the most reliable view. Impression counts are included for scale, but can vary from market to market and may not perfectly reflect exact delivery splits.

2. Competitive Set & Scope

This report covers the legal advertisers competing for clients in the market — firms based here or in a neighboring state with a genuine local presence. Non-law advertisers, and national campaigns that only spill incidental connected-TV impressions into the market, are excluded so the field reflects real local competition.

For large national advertisers, we judge local presence by their share of local-broadcast delivery — the signal that a firm is actually buying local affiliate inventory, not just airing national connected-TV. A national advertiser such as Morgan & Morgan is included in a market only where a meaningful share of its delivery runs on local Ohio broadcast affiliates; where an advertiser delivers almost entirely through national connected-TV with negligible local broadcast, it is set aside as spillover. Share of voice and all channel splits are measured across this set.

3. Channel Categorization

Each advertiser's activity is split across three mutually exclusive channels.

Broadcast
Local station-originated linear & cable inventory
Local OTA broadcast affiliates (ABC/NBC/CBS/FOX), national broadcast networks, syndicated broadcast, and traditional linear cable + satellite (Xfinity, Spectrum, Cox, Charter, DirecTV dish, Dish Network) — viewed via antenna or linear MVPD carriage.
vMVPD
Streaming delivery of linear feeds
YouTube TV, Hulu Live, Sling, fuboTV, Philo, DirecTV Stream, Cox Streaming, XFINITY Streaming, Spectrum Streaming, Dish Streaming, Uverse Streaming. Streaming delivery, but content includes broadcast-originated station feeds — kept as a separate line for clarity.
CTV / Streaming
True streaming, app-based CTV
Ad-supported streaming apps (Peacock, Pluto, Tubi, Paramount+), peripheral devices (Roku, Fire TV, Apple TV, Xbox, PlayStation), FAST channels, and digital video / app-based CTV inventory.

Publisher definitions

4. Key Attribution Information

Why vMVPD is its own line. When a viewer watches a local broadcast affiliate through a streaming bundle (YouTube TV, DirecTV Stream, Cox Streaming, Hulu Live, etc.), the delivery is internet-based but the content is broadcast-originated linear. Buyers and sellers treat vMVPD distinctly from both pure broadcast and true OTT — so we report it as a separate line rather than rolling it into either.

Satellite vs. streaming MVPDs. DirecTV satellite dish is reported as Cable. DirecTV Stream (the internet-delivered linear app) is reported as vMVPD.

OTA (Over-the-Air). Free broadcast signals received via antenna from local ABC/NBC/CBS/FOX affiliates. Reported under Broadcast.

A predominantly broadcast-led advertiser will still show single-digit-to-low-teens CTV/Streaming exposure in this view because ACR captures actual viewing across the connected-TV panel — including incidental impressions on Roku, Fire TV, Tubi, Apple TV, Pluto, Peacock, network broadcaster apps, and similar ad-supported streaming platforms. Those carry their own ad inventory distinct from the linear feed (and from vMVPDs), so they're reported under CTV / Streaming.

5. Glossary