PurePlay AI
This competitive report is password-protected.
← All Wisconsin markets
Competitive Analysis — Milwaukee DMA · YTD

Milwaukee Market Competitive Analysis

130 personal-injury advertisers make up the local competitive field in Milwaukee, WI year-to-date, running roughly 91% Broadcast / 3% vMVPD / 6% CTV. National advertisers running connected-TV into the market at scale are set aside so the field reflects real local competition. This view measures delivered viewing volume.

Market Impressions
787M
130-firm competitive set · YTD
Firms Tracked
130
Milwaukee · YTD
Streaming Share
21%
247M · of full-market delivery
Top Advertiser
Gruber
383M · 49% SOV · of 130 firms
Competitive Landscape

Who's running — and where

Across Milwaukee, WI, 373+ legal advertisers were detected delivering impressions in market year-to-date. The local competitive set of 130 firms delivered 787M impressions, running roughly 91% Broadcast / 3% vMVPD / 6% CTV/Streaming. The bars below contrast the full detected market with that set, by share.

Full Milwaukee Market (373+ advertisers · 1.2B) · Share of Delivery
Broadcast 74%
5%
CTV 21%
Broadcast 859M · vMVPD 53M · CTV 247M
Milwaukee Competitive Set (130 firms · 787M) · Share of Delivery
Broadcast 91%
3%
CTV 6%
Broadcast 714M · vMVPD 28M · CTV 45M
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
1Gruber Law Firm48.6%383M
92%4%4%
2Hupy and Abraham, S.C.18.1%142M
93%2%5%
3Habush, Habush & Rottier10.4%82M
88%6%6%
4Cannon & Dunphy8.2%65M
96%1%3%
5Pitman Kalkhoff Sicula & Dentice6.1%48M
97%1%2%
Mid-Pack
6Badger Injury Law1.5%12M
82%5%13%
7Hoglund Law Office1.2%9.7M
99%1%0%
8Carlson, Blau & Clemens0.9%7.3M
97%1%2%
9Hildebrand Law Firm0.8%6.0M
99%1%0%
10Murphy & Prachthauser Law Firm0.7%5.3M
86%13%1%
11Keller & Keller0.6%5.0M
47%4%49%
12Nicolet Law Accident & Injury Lawyers0.6%4.8M
86%1%13%
13Kim & Lavoy Attorneys At Law0.2%1.4M
95%2%3%
14Marcus & Mack Injury Lawyers0.2%1.2M
77%2%21%
15Brian Hodgkiss Injury Lawyers0.1%886K
20%65%15%
Challengers
16Tabak Law0.1%815K
84%1%15%
17Attorney Michael Wright0.1%653K
63%1%36%
18Sigman, Janssen, Sewall, Pitz & Burkham0.1%578K
1%12%87%
19Andriusis Law Office0.1%467K
98%0%2%
20Geraci Law0.1%418K
0%1%99%
21Sam Bomier Law0.0%347K
56%22%22%
22Pemberton Personal Injury Law Firm0.0%342K
36%42%22%
23Veterans Advocacy Law Group0.0%286K
84%4%12%
24Krause & Kinsman Law Firm0.0%247K
98%1%1%
25Abogado Milwaukee0.0%246K
99%0%1%
26Consumer Law Group0.0%230K
78%15%7%
27Gamez Law Firm0.0%222K
2%5%93%
28Kingree Law0.0%206K
1%9%90%
29AVA Law Group0.0%203K
10%4%86%
30Geary Disability Law0.0%197K
11%79%10%

Share of Voice is each firm's share of the 130-firm competitive set's impressions — not the full market.

Publisher Intelligence

Share of voice — who owns what

Share of voice across the competitive set — the 30 firms competing in Milwaukee 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.

“Other competitors” covers the 15 smaller firms in the set beyond the top 15, each under 3% of impressions on any publisher shown above.

Firms: GruberHupy and Abraham, S.C.Habush, Habush & RottierCannon & DunphyPitman Kalkhoff Sicula & DenticeBadger Injury LawHoglund Law OfficeCarlson, Blau & ClemensHildebrandMurphy & PrachthauserKeller & KellerNicolet Law Accident &Kim & Lavoy Attorneys At LawMarcus & MackBrian Hodgkiss Other competitors

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.

WITI
Broadcast
231M impressions · 30% of set · 22 of 30 active
  1. 1
    Gruber
    112M
    48.4%
  2. 2
    Hupy and Abraham, S.C.
    44M
    18.9%
  3. 3
    Cannon & Dunphy
    27M
    11.7%
  4. 4
    Pitman Kalkhoff Sicula & Dentice
    17M
    7.5%
  5. 5
    Habush, Habush & Rottier
    16M
    6.8%
Show all 22 analyzed competitors
  1. 6
    Carlson, Blau & Clemens
    5.1M
    2.2%
  2. 7
    Hoglund Law Office
    3.5M
    1.5%
  3. 8
    Badger Injury Law
    2.3M
    1.0%
  4. 9
    Nicolet Law Accident &
    1.5M
    0.7%
  5. 10
    Murphy & Prachthauser
    1.2M
    0.5%
  6. 11
    Keller & Keller
    850K
    0.4%
  7. 12
    Kim & Lavoy Attorneys At Law
    662K
    0.3%
  8. 13
    Attorney Michael Wright
    289K
    0.1%
  9. 14
    Marcus & Mack
    38K
    0.0%
  10. 15
    Sam Bomier Law
    32K
    0.0%
  11. 16
    Hildebrand
    7K
    0.0%
  12. 17
    Brian Hodgkiss
    4K
    0.0%
  13. 18
    Gamez
    2K
    0.0%
  14. 19
    Geary Disability Law
    1K
    0.0%
  15. 20
    Pemberton Personal
    1K
    0.0%
  16. 21
    Krause & Kinsman
    773
    0.0%
  17. 22
    Sigman, Janssen, Sewall, Pitz & Burkham
    227
    0.0%
WISN
Broadcast
191M impressions · 25% of set · 21 of 30 active
  1. 1
    Gruber
    100M
    52.1%
  2. 2
    Habush, Habush & Rottier
    28M
    14.6%
  3. 3
    Hupy and Abraham, S.C.
    20M
    10.2%
  4. 4
    Cannon & Dunphy
    17M
    8.9%
  5. 5
    Pitman Kalkhoff Sicula & Dentice
    14M
    7.2%
Show all 21 analyzed competitors
  1. 6
    Badger Injury Law
    7.0M
    3.7%
  2. 7
    Hildebrand
    1.8M
    0.9%
  3. 8
    Murphy & Prachthauser
    1.6M
    0.8%
  4. 9
    Carlson, Blau & Clemens
    987K
    0.5%
  5. 10
    Hoglund Law Office
    940K
    0.5%
  6. 11
    Marcus & Mack
    400K
    0.2%
  7. 12
    Keller & Keller
    310K
    0.2%
  8. 13
    Brian Hodgkiss
    136K
    0.1%
  9. 14
    Sam Bomier Law
    120K
    0.1%
  10. 15
    Attorney Michael Wright
    67K
    0.0%
  11. 16
    Pemberton Personal
    38K
    0.0%
  12. 17
    Geary Disability Law
    16K
    0.0%
  13. 18
    Nicolet Law Accident &
    14K
    0.0%
  14. 19
    Kim & Lavoy Attorneys At Law
    3K
    0.0%
  15. 20
    Sigman, Janssen, Sewall, Pitz & Burkham
    3K
    0.0%
  16. 21
    Veterans Advocacy Law Group
    227
    0.0%
WTMJ
Broadcast
116M impressions · 15% of set · 21 of 30 active
  1. 1
    Gruber
    62M
    53.1%
  2. 2
    Habush, Habush & Rottier
    18M
    15.2%
  3. 3
    Hupy and Abraham, S.C.
    16M
    13.6%
  4. 4
    Cannon & Dunphy
    12M
    10.1%
  5. 5
    Pitman Kalkhoff Sicula & Dentice
    5.0M
    4.3%
Show all 21 analyzed competitors
  1. 6
    Hoglund Law Office
    1.6M
    1.4%
  2. 7
    Nicolet Law Accident &
    1.3M
    1.1%
  3. 8
    Murphy & Prachthauser
    827K
    0.7%
  4. 9
    Marcus & Mack
    281K
    0.2%
  5. 10
    Keller & Keller
    142K
    0.1%
  6. 11
    Kim & Lavoy Attorneys At Law
    110K
    0.1%
  7. 12
    Pemberton Personal
    52K
    0.0%
  8. 13
    Sam Bomier Law
    18K
    0.0%
  9. 14
    Attorney Michael Wright
    10K
    0.0%
  10. 15
    Brian Hodgkiss
    10K
    0.0%
  11. 16
    Hildebrand
    2K
    0.0%
  12. 17
    Badger Injury Law
    773
    0.0%
  13. 18
    Geary Disability Law
    681
    0.0%
  14. 19
    Gamez
    318
    0.0%
  15. 20
    Krause & Kinsman
    273
    0.0%
  16. 21
    AVA Law Group
    227
    0.0%
WDJT
Broadcast
63M impressions · 8% of set · 23 of 30 active
  1. 1
    Gruber
    25M
    40.0%
  2. 2
    Hupy and Abraham, S.C.
    13M
    20.1%
  3. 3
    Habush, Habush & Rottier
    8.3M
    13.1%
  4. 4
    Pitman Kalkhoff Sicula & Dentice
    6.3M
    9.9%
  5. 5
    Hildebrand
    4.1M
    6.4%
Show all 23 analyzed competitors
  1. 6
    Cannon & Dunphy
    4.0M
    6.4%
  2. 7
    Murphy & Prachthauser
    748K
    1.2%
  3. 8
    Hoglund Law Office
    436K
    0.7%
  4. 9
    Nicolet Law Accident &
    431K
    0.7%
  5. 10
    Carlson, Blau & Clemens
    345K
    0.5%
  6. 11
    Keller & Keller
    239K
    0.4%
  7. 12
    Krause & Kinsman
    237K
    0.4%
  8. 13
    Kim & Lavoy Attorneys At Law
    36K
    0.1%
  9. 14
    Attorney Michael Wright
    31K
    0.0%
  10. 15
    Sam Bomier Law
    22K
    0.0%
  11. 16
    Brian Hodgkiss
    21K
    0.0%
  12. 17
    Pemberton Personal
    16K
    0.0%
  13. 18
    Marcus & Mack
    15K
    0.0%
  14. 19
    Veterans Advocacy Law Group
    5K
    0.0%
  15. 20
    Geary Disability Law
    4K
    0.0%
  16. 21
    Kingree Law
    3K
    0.0%
  17. 22
    Sigman, Janssen, Sewall, Pitz & Burkham
    863
    0.0%
  18. 23
    Badger Injury Law
    500
    0.0%
EVTV
39M impressions · 5% of set · 12 of 30 active
  1. 1
    Gruber
    16M
    40.8%
  2. 2
    Hupy and Abraham, S.C.
    16M
    40.7%
  3. 3
    Pitman Kalkhoff Sicula & Dentice
    3.8M
    9.9%
  4. 4
    Hoglund Law Office
    2.0M
    5.2%
  5. 5
    Cannon & Dunphy
    623K
    1.6%
Show all 12 analyzed competitors
  1. 6
    Tabak Law
    378K
    1.0%
  2. 7
    Keller & Keller
    184K
    0.5%
  3. 8
    Marcus & Mack
    107K
    0.3%
  4. 9
    Habush, Habush & Rottier
    7K
    0.0%
  5. 10
    Sam Bomier Law
    545
    0.0%
  6. 11
    Gamez
    273
    0.0%
  7. 12
    Badger Injury Law
    227
    0.0%
WBME
Broadcast
20M impressions · 3% of set · 14 of 30 active
  1. 1
    Hupy and Abraham, S.C.
    11M
    56.7%
  2. 2
    Gruber
    8.3M
    41.3%
  3. 3
    Keller & Keller
    282K
    1.4%
  4. 4
    Carlson, Blau & Clemens
    93K
    0.5%
  5. 5
    Veterans Advocacy Law Group
    18K
    0.1%
Show all 14 analyzed competitors
  1. 6
    Marcus & Mack
    5K
    0.0%
  2. 7
    Pemberton Personal
    4K
    0.0%
  3. 8
    Brian Hodgkiss
    1K
    0.0%
  4. 9
    Hoglund Law Office
    318
    0.0%
  5. 10
    Nicolet Law Accident &
    273
    0.0%
  6. 11
    Sam Bomier Law
    273
    0.0%
  7. 12
    Pitman Kalkhoff Sicula & Dentice
    227
    0.0%
  8. 13
    Krause & Kinsman
    227
    0.0%
  9. 14
    Kingree Law
    227
    0.0%
Spectrum Streaming
vMVPD
19M impressions · 2% of set · 30 of 30 active
  1. 1
    Gruber
    12M
    62.0%
  2. 2
    Habush, Habush & Rottier
    3.7M
    19.0%
  3. 3
    Hupy and Abraham, S.C.
    1.2M
    6.3%
  4. 4
    Murphy & Prachthauser
    689K
    3.6%
  5. 5
    Badger Injury Law
    509K
    2.7%
Show all 30 analyzed competitors
  1. 6
    Cannon & Dunphy
    393K
    2.0%
  2. 7
    Pitman Kalkhoff Sicula & Dentice
    199K
    1.0%
  3. 8
    Brian Hodgkiss
    148K
    0.8%
  4. 9
    Keller & Keller
    95K
    0.5%
  5. 10
    Pemberton Personal
    77K
    0.4%
  6. 11
    Hoglund Law Office
    48K
    0.2%
  7. 12
    Carlson, Blau & Clemens
    47K
    0.2%
  8. 13
    Hildebrand
    37K
    0.2%
  9. 14
    Geary Disability Law
    32K
    0.2%
  10. 15
    Nicolet Law Accident &
    30K
    0.2%
  11. 16
    Sam Bomier Law
    29K
    0.2%
  12. 17
    Consumer Law Group
    22K
    0.1%
  13. 18
    Sigman, Janssen, Sewall, Pitz & Burkham
    16K
    0.1%
  14. 19
    Kim & Lavoy Attorneys At Law
    14K
    0.1%
  15. 20
    Kingree Law
    13K
    0.1%
  16. 21
    Marcus & Mack
    10K
    0.0%
  17. 22
    Veterans Advocacy Law Group
    8K
    0.0%
  18. 23
    Gamez
    7K
    0.0%
  19. 24
    Tabak Law
    4K
    0.0%
  20. 25
    Geraci Law
    4K
    0.0%
  21. 26
    Attorney Michael Wright
    3K
    0.0%
  22. 27
    AVA Law Group
    2K
    0.0%
  23. 28
    Krause & Kinsman
    2K
    0.0%
  24. 29
    Andriusis Law Office
    676
    0.0%
  25. 30
    Abogado Milwaukee
    630
    0.0%
WVTV
Broadcast
13M impressions · 2% of set · 13 of 30 active
  1. 1
    Gruber
    6.1M
    46.6%
  2. 2
    Hupy and Abraham, S.C.
    5.4M
    41.5%
  3. 3
    Hoglund Law Office
    738K
    5.6%
  4. 4
    Cannon & Dunphy
    374K
    2.9%
  5. 5
    Tabak Law
    305K
    2.3%
Show all 13 analyzed competitors
  1. 6
    Keller & Keller
    68K
    0.5%
  2. 7
    Marcus & Mack
    58K
    0.4%
  3. 8
    Habush, Habush & Rottier
    7K
    0.1%
  4. 9
    Attorney Michael Wright
    5K
    0.0%
  5. 10
    Sam Bomier Law
    545
    0.0%
  6. 11
    Hildebrand
    500
    0.0%
  7. 12
    Brian Hodgkiss
    227
    0.0%
  8. 13
    Pemberton Personal
    227
    0.0%
WMLW
Broadcast
13M impressions · 2% of set · 15 of 30 active
  1. 1
    Gruber
    7.4M
    56.6%
  2. 2
    Hupy and Abraham, S.C.
    4.4M
    34.1%
  3. 3
    Habush, Habush & Rottier
    395K
    3.0%
  4. 4
    Hoglund Law Office
    282K
    2.2%
  5. 5
    Veterans Advocacy Law Group
    210K
    1.6%
Show all 15 analyzed competitors
  1. 6
    Carlson, Blau & Clemens
    146K
    1.1%
  2. 7
    Keller & Keller
    143K
    1.1%
  3. 8
    Attorney Michael Wright
    10K
    0.1%
  4. 9
    Pitman Kalkhoff Sicula & Dentice
    8K
    0.1%
  5. 10
    Cannon & Dunphy
    6K
    0.0%
  6. 11
    Marcus & Mack
    4K
    0.0%
  7. 12
    Hildebrand
    2K
    0.0%
  8. 13
    Krause & Kinsman
    1K
    0.0%
  9. 14
    Brian Hodgkiss
    909
    0.0%
  10. 15
    Sam Bomier Law
    409
    0.0%
YouTube App
Streaming App
12M impressions · 2% of set · 29 of 30 active
  1. 1
    Gruber
    6.5M
    55.7%
  2. 2
    Hupy and Abraham, S.C.
    1.9M
    15.9%
  3. 3
    Cannon & Dunphy
    734K
    6.3%
  4. 4
    Keller & Keller
    723K
    6.2%
  5. 5
    Pitman Kalkhoff Sicula & Dentice
    627K
    5.3%
Show all 29 analyzed competitors
  1. 6
    Badger Injury Law
    330K
    2.8%
  2. 7
    Attorney Michael Wright
    203K
    1.7%
  3. 8
    Marcus & Mack
    176K
    1.5%
  4. 9
    AVA Law Group
    124K
    1.1%
  5. 10
    Sigman, Janssen, Sewall, Pitz & Burkham
    99K
    0.8%
  6. 11
    Kingree Law
    79K
    0.7%
  7. 12
    Gamez
    68K
    0.6%
  8. 13
    Nicolet Law Accident &
    64K
    0.5%
  9. 14
    Veterans Advocacy Law Group
    33K
    0.3%
  10. 15
    Habush, Habush & Rottier
    23K
    0.2%
  11. 16
    Brian Hodgkiss
    20K
    0.2%
  12. 17
    Carlson, Blau & Clemens
    11K
    0.1%
  13. 18
    Kim & Lavoy Attorneys At Law
    11K
    0.1%
  14. 19
    Sam Bomier Law
    2K
    0.0%
  15. 20
    Consumer Law Group
    2K
    0.0%
  16. 21
    Pemberton Personal
    2K
    0.0%
  17. 22
    Geary Disability Law
    1K
    0.0%
  18. 23
    Geraci Law
    1K
    0.0%
  19. 24
    Hildebrand
    631
    0.0%
  20. 25
    Tabak Law
    405
    0.0%
  21. 26
    Krause & Kinsman
    315
    0.0%
  22. 27
    Hoglund Law Office
    270
    0.0%
  23. 28
    Abogado Milwaukee
    225
    0.0%
  24. 29
    Murphy & Prachthauser
    180
    0.0%
WYTU
Broadcast
9.2M impressions · 1% of set · 8 of 30 active
  1. 1
    Gruber
    5.6M
    60.8%
  2. 2
    Hupy and Abraham, S.C.
    1.6M
    17.1%
  3. 3
    Nicolet Law Accident &
    866K
    9.4%
  4. 4
    Andriusis Law Office
    453K
    4.9%
  5. 5
    Habush, Habush & Rottier
    254K
    2.8%
Show all 8 analyzed competitors
  1. 6
    Abogado Milwaukee
    232K
    2.5%
  2. 7
    Carlson, Blau & Clemens
    230K
    2.5%
  3. 8
    Keller & Keller
    546
    0.0%
OTA
Broadcast
7.2M impressions · 1% of set · 23 of 30 active
  1. 1
    Gruber
    4.1M
    56.5%
  2. 2
    Hupy and Abraham, S.C.
    1.2M
    16.3%
  3. 3
    Habush, Habush & Rottier
    572K
    7.9%
  4. 4
    Cannon & Dunphy
    549K
    7.6%
  5. 5
    Pitman Kalkhoff Sicula & Dentice
    402K
    5.6%
Show all 23 analyzed competitors
  1. 6
    Carlson, Blau & Clemens
    139K
    1.9%
  2. 7
    Badger Injury Law
    76K
    1.1%
  3. 8
    Hildebrand
    63K
    0.9%
  4. 9
    Hoglund Law Office
    50K
    0.7%
  5. 10
    Nicolet Law Accident &
    39K
    0.5%
  6. 11
    Murphy & Prachthauser
    22K
    0.3%
  7. 12
    AVA Law Group
    15K
    0.2%
  8. 13
    Keller & Keller
    11K
    0.2%
  9. 14
    Abogado Milwaukee
    8K
    0.1%
  10. 15
    Marcus & Mack
    5K
    0.1%
  11. 16
    Krause & Kinsman
    3K
    0.0%
  12. 17
    Tabak Law
    3K
    0.0%
  13. 18
    Andriusis Law Office
    3K
    0.0%
  14. 19
    Kim & Lavoy Attorneys At Law
    2K
    0.0%
  15. 20
    Veterans Advocacy Law Group
    2K
    0.0%
  16. 21
    Attorney Michael Wright
    727
    0.0%
  17. 22
    Consumer Law Group
    727
    0.0%
  18. 23
    Sam Bomier Law
    682
    0.0%
Other App
Streaming App
6.7M impressions · 1% of set · 30 of 30 active
  1. 1
    Gruber
    2.5M
    37.9%
  2. 2
    Habush, Habush & Rottier
    1.9M
    28.2%
  3. 3
    Hupy and Abraham, S.C.
    913K
    13.7%
  4. 4
    Cannon & Dunphy
    457K
    6.9%
  5. 5
    Sigman, Janssen, Sewall, Pitz & Burkham
    324K
    4.9%
Show all 30 analyzed competitors
  1. 6
    Keller & Keller
    128K
    1.9%
  2. 7
    Nicolet Law Accident &
    76K
    1.1%
  3. 8
    Geraci Law
    59K
    0.9%
  4. 9
    Badger Injury Law
    56K
    0.8%
  5. 10
    Tabak Law
    40K
    0.6%
  6. 11
    Pitman Kalkhoff Sicula & Dentice
    35K
    0.5%
  7. 12
    Sam Bomier Law
    34K
    0.5%
  8. 13
    Carlson, Blau & Clemens
    26K
    0.4%
  9. 14
    Brian Hodgkiss
    23K
    0.3%
  10. 15
    Pemberton Personal
    18K
    0.3%
  11. 16
    Marcus & Mack
    9K
    0.1%
  12. 17
    Hildebrand
    8K
    0.1%
  13. 18
    Gamez
    8K
    0.1%
  14. 19
    Hoglund Law Office
    6K
    0.1%
  15. 20
    Attorney Michael Wright
    5K
    0.1%
  16. 21
    Geary Disability Law
    5K
    0.1%
  17. 22
    AVA Law Group
    5K
    0.1%
  18. 23
    Kingree Law
    5K
    0.1%
  19. 24
    Murphy & Prachthauser
    4K
    0.1%
  20. 25
    Consumer Law Group
    4K
    0.1%
  21. 26
    Kim & Lavoy Attorneys At Law
    3K
    0.0%
  22. 27
    Andriusis Law Office
    2K
    0.0%
  23. 28
    Abogado Milwaukee
    810
    0.0%
  24. 29
    Veterans Advocacy Law Group
    541
    0.0%
  25. 30
    Krause & Kinsman
    226
    0.0%
Tubi TV App
Streaming App
5.2M impressions · 1% of set · 26 of 30 active
  1. 1
    Gruber
    1.5M
    29.9%
  2. 2
    Hupy and Abraham, S.C.
    1.3M
    24.9%
  3. 3
    Badger Injury Law
    819K
    15.8%
  4. 4
    Habush, Habush & Rottier
    471K
    9.1%
  5. 5
    Keller & Keller
    319K
    6.2%
Show all 26 analyzed competitors
  1. 6
    Geraci Law
    230K
    4.4%
  2. 7
    Nicolet Law Accident &
    193K
    3.7%
  3. 8
    Cannon & Dunphy
    160K
    3.1%
  4. 9
    Tabak Law
    39K
    0.8%
  5. 10
    Sam Bomier Law
    16K
    0.3%
  6. 11
    Pitman Kalkhoff Sicula & Dentice
    15K
    0.3%
  7. 12
    Gamez
    14K
    0.3%
  8. 13
    Kingree Law
    14K
    0.3%
  9. 14
    Marcus & Mack
    11K
    0.2%
  10. 15
    Sigman, Janssen, Sewall, Pitz & Burkham
    11K
    0.2%
  11. 16
    AVA Law Group
    7K
    0.1%
  12. 17
    Carlson, Blau & Clemens
    5K
    0.1%
  13. 18
    Kim & Lavoy Attorneys At Law
    4K
    0.1%
  14. 19
    Brian Hodgkiss
    3K
    0.1%
  15. 20
    Attorney Michael Wright
    3K
    0.1%
  16. 21
    Consumer Law Group
    2K
    0.0%
  17. 22
    Pemberton Personal
    766
    0.0%
  18. 23
    Krause & Kinsman
    270
    0.0%
  19. 24
    Hildebrand
    225
    0.0%
  20. 25
    Geary Disability Law
    180
    0.0%
  21. 26
    Hoglund Law Office
    45
    0.0%
Roku
Device
5.0M impressions · 1% of set · 30 of 30 active
  1. 1
    Gruber
    2.4M
    47.9%
  2. 2
    Habush, Habush & Rottier
    1.0M
    20.2%
  3. 3
    Hupy and Abraham, S.C.
    668K
    13.3%
  4. 4
    Cannon & Dunphy
    276K
    5.5%
  5. 5
    Keller & Keller
    164K
    3.3%
Show all 30 analyzed competitors
  1. 6
    Badger Injury Law
    141K
    2.8%
  2. 7
    Pitman Kalkhoff Sicula & Dentice
    64K
    1.3%
  3. 8
    Nicolet Law Accident &
    64K
    1.3%
  4. 9
    Pemberton Personal
    40K
    0.8%
  5. 10
    Brian Hodgkiss
    34K
    0.7%
  6. 11
    Geraci Law
    25K
    0.5%
  7. 12
    Gamez
    12K
    0.2%
  8. 13
    Kingree Law
    11K
    0.2%
  9. 14
    Carlson, Blau & Clemens
    11K
    0.2%
  10. 15
    Sigman, Janssen, Sewall, Pitz & Burkham
    10K
    0.2%
  11. 16
    Sam Bomier Law
    10K
    0.2%
  12. 17
    Hildebrand
    10K
    0.2%
  13. 18
    Marcus & Mack
    10K
    0.2%
  14. 19
    Murphy & Prachthauser
    9K
    0.2%
  15. 20
    Hoglund Law Office
    8K
    0.2%
  16. 21
    Geary Disability Law
    8K
    0.2%
  17. 22
    Tabak Law
    7K
    0.1%
  18. 23
    AVA Law Group
    5K
    0.1%
  19. 24
    Andriusis Law Office
    5K
    0.1%
  20. 25
    Attorney Michael Wright
    4K
    0.1%
  21. 26
    Kim & Lavoy Attorneys At Law
    3K
    0.1%
  22. 27
    Consumer Law Group
    950
    0.0%
  23. 28
    Veterans Advocacy Law Group
    900
    0.0%
  24. 29
    Krause & Kinsman
    405
    0.0%
  25. 30
    Abogado Milwaukee
    315
    0.0%
Competitor Creative

The creative landscape

A sample of spots running in the Milwaukee market this period.

GLF
One Call, That's All
Gruber Law Firm
Personal Injury
HHR
Let's Talk
Habush, Habush & Rottier
Personal Injury
CD
Call Now
Cannon & Dunphy
Personal Injury
CBC
Contact Us
Carlson, Blau & Clemens
Personal Injury
MP
We Work For You
Murphy & Prachthauser
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 and dedicated local advertising. Non-law advertisers and national advertisers whose impressions are incidental spillover from national campaigns are excluded, so the field reflects real local competition.

Because the underlying data shows where impressions were detected — not how the inventory was purchased — we use a firm's share of local-broadcast delivery as the signal of whether it is buying locally. National advertisers running connected-TV into the market at scale (for example Morgan & Morgan and Dimopoulos) register only low-single-digit local-broadcast delivery here, versus much higher shares for the local firms, so they read as national spillover and are set aside. Share of voice and all channel splits are measured across the local competitive 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