It has been just over two years since the publication of the last report on ranking factors in local searches. Since then, the SEO industry has undergone significant changes in how we understand and execute strategies, driven by the growth of large language models (LLMs) such as ChatGPT and Gemini, especially in informational queries.
Local search, however, has remained relatively isolated from this AI revolution. While websites based on informational content have seen their traffic drop drastically with the introduction of AI Overviews, AI Mode, ChatGPT, Gemini, and others, the search for and discovery of local businesses continues to happen predominantly through Google's local results. This is because, for queries with local intent, this is still a far superior experience to the answers generated by LLMs.
Understanding what influences local rankings and how to optimize them remains extremely valuable for businesses and agencies.
This doesn't mean that local research hasn't changed. It has, and significantly. Keep reading to understand what's new.
Video summary
Watch the video to see the main highlights and conclusions from Darren's research this year.
What is the Local Search Ranking Factors Report?
Local Search Ranking Factors is the leading SEO resource for understanding how to rank in Google's local search results. It was created by David Mihm in 2008 and has been led by Darren Shaw since 2017.
Forty-seven leading local research experts are invited to answer an in-depth, approximately two-hour questionnaire. They evaluate and score 187 factors, in addition to answering open-ended questions about what they believe drives local rankings today. Each factor receives a score from 0 to 5 in the following areas:
- Impact on the ranking of the local package/Maps
- Impact on local organic ranking
- Impact on conversion
- Impact on visibility in AI searches (new in 2026)

The scores are consolidated and organized by total impact, indicating which factors experts consider most relevant and which have little or no effect (the so-called "myths" of local SEO).
None of the experts have privileged access to the inner workings of Google's local search algorithm. The list of factors and answers are based on more than a decade of analysis, experience, research, and practical testing of the signals Google uses to evaluate and rank businesses.
Nevertheless, the factors that appear at the top of the lists consistently reflect those that have the greatest impact on the rankings, according to professionals who optimize local businesses on a daily basis.
Local search classification factor groups
Individual factors are organized into the following groups:

Weighting of factor groups for 2026
Research participants estimate the weight that Google assigns to each group of factors within the local search algorithm, both for the local/Maps package and for local organic results. New for 2026, weightings were also assigned to visibility in AI-powered searches.
The data is aggregated into a graph that provides a clear view of the relative importance of each group of signals.
The considerations change over time
The comparative chart shows how experts' perception of the weight of each group has changed over the last six editions of the report.

By 2026, the most relevant changes indicate a greater importance of assessment signals and behavioral signals. This aligns with what has also been observed in practice with clients.
On-page and link signals showed a slight decrease. Social signals were reintroduced in this edition, which likely redistributed some of the weight among the groups.
Here's where Darren's personal perspective comes in: he said he was surprised to see that citations dropped by about half a percentage point, maintaining the downward trend of previous editions. According to him, there was a feeling that the market was beginning to positively reassess the value of citations, possibly in the context of AI research. Even so, Darren believes that AI itself is revealing how crucial citations remain for traditional local SEO as well.
New features for 2026
Visibility in AI-powered search
In this edition, a new column has been added to the factor scoring section: the impact of each factor on the visibility of responses generated by AI-based search engines.
When completing the questionnaire, Darren observed that this metric is, in part, ambiguous. For example, when evaluating a factor such as "Additional Categories in Google Business Profile," the score can vary depending on the AI platform considered. For ChatGPT, the impact would be practically nil, while for Google AI Mode or Gemini, it could be significant, since these tools have direct access to Google data.
Nevertheless, the results of this scoring are particularly valuable and offer a clear roadmap of the most important factors for those wishing to improve visibility in AI responses. It is worthwhile to carefully analyze the visibility factors in AI-powered searches.
New factors added
The list of factors has grown significantly in this edition. 47 new factors have been added, and some of them have already debuted directly in the top 10 of the local package/Maps ranking, given their high relevance to local search rankings.
Check out the new factors added
This table brings together all the new factors, allowing you to sort the columns and compare their importance in each dimension.
(Note: Some factors appear as N/A in the Conversion column because behavioral, link, citation, and social signals were excluded from this section.)
| Factor | Pack/Maps | Local Organic | Search with AI | Conversion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Business open at the time of search (business hours) | 5 | 129 | 104 | 6 |
| Address visible on Google Business Profile (not SAB) | 7 | 95 | 54 | 26 |
| Click-through rate (CTR) in Pack/Maps | 13 | 93 | 130 | N/A |
| Predefined services in GBP | 22 | 145 | 127 | 70 |
| Keywords in the titles of personalized services | 30 | 132 | 111 | 54 |
| Reviews with photos | 44 | 125 | 94 | 27 |
| Photo and video quality | 46 | 116 | 119 | 11 |
| Personalized services at GBP | 49 | 148 | 120 | 61 |
| Keywords in anchor text of internal links | 52 | 19 | 51 | N/A |
| Photos submitted by users | 77 | 143 | 135 | 56 |
| The "Peak Hours" section indicates high traffic | 78 | 167 | 179 | 40 |
| Relevance of photos to categories | 79 | 137 | 133 | 22 |
| GBP landing page update | 83 | 53 | 77 | 73 |
| Reviews with videos | 88 | 141 | 114 | 42 |
| Recent photos in GBP | 90 | 154 | 151 | 49 |
| Relevance of videos to categories | 95 | 139 | 138 | 32 |
| Company age (opening date in GBP) | 99 | 115 | 124 | 58 |
| Recent videos in GBP | 100 | 159 | 157 | 62 |
| Website content update | 109 | 25 | 41 | 63 |
| Updating content on service pages | 112 | 31 | 61 | 68 |
| Frequency of activity of the owner/manager | 114 | 174 | 155 | 92 |
| Local topics aligned with keywords | 118 | 121 | 123 | 89 |
| Keywords in GBP service descriptions | 125 | 165 | 139 | 93 |
| Scannable site structure (headings, bullet points, images) | 128 | 26 | 10 | 33 |
| Evaluations with answers to questions | 131 | 131 | 100 | 77 |
| Social profiles linked to GBP | 132 | 146 | 136 | 85 |
| Site architecture organized by topics | 133 | 21 | 39 | 71 |
| FAQs on the GBP landing page | 135 | 74 | 55 | 74 |
| Keywords in unlinked mentions of the brand | 136 | 75 | 47 | N/A |
| Products added to GBP via NMX | 137 | 140 | 147 | 50 |
| FAQs on service pages | 142 | 60 | 43 | 57 |
| Social media updates in GBP | 148 | 157 | 159 | N/A |
| Reactions to photos and videos | 154 | 182 | 168 | 100 |
| Signs of engagement on the website (scrolling, clicks, etc.) | 157 | 47 | 145 | N/A |
| Users mentioning the company on social media | 158 | 77 | 42 | N/A |
| Reactions to evaluations | 160 | 181 | 166 | 99 |
| Website content marked with Schema | 162 | 69 | 44 | 111 |
| Text with keyword visible in photos (overlay) | 165 | 163 | 161 | 97 |
| Recency of posts on social media | 168 | 108 | 92 | N/A |
| Engagement on social media profiles | 173 | 99 | 102 | N/A |
| Quality of posts on social media | 174 | 114 | 107 | N/A |
| WhatsApp/SMS enabled | 175 | 184 | 182 | 52 |
| Frequency of posts on social media | 179 | 113 | 110 | N/A |
| Number of posts on social media | 181 | 117 | 108 | N/A |
| Keywords in image metadata | 182 | 147 | 165 | 119 |
| Title Tag Length | 185 | 119 | 162 | 110 |
| Number of followers on social media | 187 | 136 | 132 | N/A |
This table brings together all the new factors, allowing you to sort the columns and compare their importance in each dimension.
(Note: Some factors appear as N/A in the Conversion column because behavioral, link, citation, and social signals were excluded from this section.)
| Factor | Pack/Maps | Local Organic | Search with AI | Conversion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Business open at the time of search (business hours) | 5 | 129 | 104 | 6 |
| Address visible on Google Business Profile (not SAB) | 7 | 95 | 54 | 26 |
| Click-through rate (CTR) in Pack/Maps | 13 | 93 | 130 | N/A |
| Predefined services in GBP | 22 | 145 | 127 | 70 |
| Keywords in the titles of personalized services | 30 | 132 | 111 | 54 |
| Reviews with photos | 44 | 125 | 94 | 27 |
| Photo and video quality | 46 | 116 | 119 | 11 |
| Personalized services at GBP | 49 | 148 | 120 | 61 |
| Keywords in anchor text of internal links | 52 | 19 | 51 | N/A |
| Photos submitted by users | 77 | 143 | 135 | 56 |
| The "Peak Hours" section indicates high traffic | 78 | 167 | 179 | 40 |
| Relevance of photos to categories | 79 | 137 | 133 | 22 |
| GBP landing page update | 83 | 53 | 77 | 73 |
| Reviews with videos | 88 | 141 | 114 | 42 |
| Recent photos in GBP | 90 | 154 | 151 | 49 |
| Relevance of videos to categories | 95 | 139 | 138 | 32 |
| Company age (opening date in GBP) | 99 | 115 | 124 | 58 |
| Recent videos in GBP | 100 | 159 | 157 | 62 |
| Website content update | 109 | 25 | 41 | 63 |
| Updating content on service pages | 112 | 31 | 61 | 68 |
| Frequency of activity of the owner/manager | 114 | 174 | 155 | 92 |
| Local topics aligned with keywords | 118 | 121 | 123 | 89 |
| Keywords in GBP service descriptions | 125 | 165 | 139 | 93 |
| Scannable site structure (headings, bullet points, images) | 128 | 26 | 10 | 33 |
| Evaluations with answers to questions | 131 | 131 | 100 | 77 |
| Social profiles linked to GBP | 132 | 146 | 136 | 85 |
| Site architecture organized by topics | 133 | 21 | 39 | 71 |
| FAQs on the GBP landing page | 135 | 74 | 55 | 74 |
| Keywords in unlinked mentions of the brand | 136 | 75 | 47 | N/A |
| Products added to GBP via NMX | 137 | 140 | 147 | 50 |
| FAQs on service pages | 142 | 60 | 43 | 57 |
| Social media updates in GBP | 148 | 157 | 159 | N/A |
| Reactions to photos and videos | 154 | 182 | 168 | 100 |
| Signs of engagement on the website (scrolling, clicks, etc.) | 157 | 47 | 145 | N/A |
| Users mentioning the company on social media | 158 | 77 | 42 | N/A |
| Reactions to evaluations | 160 | 181 | 166 | 99 |
| Website content marked with Schema | 162 | 69 | 44 | 111 |
| Text with keyword visible in photos (overlay) | 165 | 163 | 161 | 97 |
| Recency of posts on social media | 168 | 108 | 92 | N/A |
| Engagement on social media profiles | 173 | 99 | 102 | N/A |
| Quality of posts on social media | 174 | 114 | 107 | N/A |
| WhatsApp/SMS enabled | 175 | 184 | 182 | 52 |
| Frequency of posts on social media | 179 | 113 | 110 | N/A |
| Number of posts on social media | 181 | 117 | 108 | N/A |
| Keywords in image metadata | 182 | 147 | 165 | 119 |
| Title Tag Length | 185 | 119 | 162 | 110 |
| Number of followers on social media | 187 | 136 | 132 | N/A |
In addition, eight new negative or suspension risk factors were included, assessed according to their potential impact.
Check out the new negative factors/risk factors for suspension
| Factor | Negative Impact | Risk of Suspension |
|---|---|---|
| Too many keywords in the GBP description | 21 | 35 |
| Presence of AI-generated content in the profile | 31 | 25 |
| Excessive keywords in Google posts/updates | 38 | 51 |
| Display address in GBP if you are a service area company (SAB) | 39 | 105 |
| Configure service areas that are more than 2 hours away | 53 | 82 |
| AI-generated photos or videos on your profile | 55 | 45 |
| Overlapping service areas across multiple GBPs | 71 | 102 |
| The website URL redirects to another domain | 115 | 115 |
| Factor | Negative Impact | Risk of Suspension |
|---|---|---|
| Too many keywords in the GBP description | 21 | 35 |
| Presence of AI-generated content in the profile | 31 | 25 |
| Excessive keywords in Google posts/updates | 38 | 51 |
| Display address in GBP if you are a service area company (SAB) | 39 | 105 |
| Configure service areas that are more than 2 hours away | 53 | 82 |
| AI-generated photos or videos on your profile | 55 | 45 |
| Overlapping service areas across multiple GBPs | 71 | 102 |
| The website URL redirects to another domain | 115 | 115 |
Observations
New factors of note
The business was open at the time of the search (business hours) — position #5
In December 2023, Joy Hawkins revealed, in a webinar, the existence of a new local ranking factor: whether the business is open or closed at the time of the search. The discovery had a major impact on the local SEO community.
Therefore, Darren included this factor in this year's research, and it quickly reached fifth place in impact in the ranking. In practice, this is clearly reflected: when the business is open, it can comfortably occupy the top positions; about an hour before closing, it begins to lose visibility and, when it is effectively closed, it tends to be replaced by competitors that are still in operation.
Google prioritizes displaying publicly available businesses. In sectors like retail and food, this makes sense. In others, such as residential services or law firms, the criterion can be problematic. Darren questions, for example, whether it makes sense for a law firm to become invisible simply because it is outside of business hours.
This behavior has led some companies to artificially extend their hours or hire telephone customer service to maintain their profile as "open 24 hours." Darren warns that this may be acceptable for businesses that operate exclusively by appointment, but it is inappropriate for physical establishments where customers can visit in person. Stating unrealistic hours frustrates consumers, can generate negative reviews, and violates Google's guidelines.
The address must be visible on the Business Profile on Google (not as SAB) — position #7
Here, Darren takes a personal stance. The scores indicate that removing the address from the Company Profile often results in a loss of rankings, and he acknowledges that he has seen this happen. However, he has also observed cases where the address was removed and the rankings remained exactly the same.
This raises a question: why do some companies lose all visibility by hiding their address, while others do not?
Darren says he doesn't have a definitive answer yet, but he's investigating. For now, he's working with two hypotheses:
- When a profile was originally registered at one address, then changed location and removed that address to comply with guidelines, the ratings may "revert" to the previous address. In other words, they don't disappear, they just return to the location used for the initial verification.
- In other cases, companies remove the address, lose visibility, and confirm that the displayed address was exactly the same one used for verification. These scenarios cannot be explained by a change of location, suggesting the existence of flaws in Google's system.
Darren even cites a case where Google repositioned a company more than 300 km away, in a region completely irrelevant to the business. To identify this type of error, he uses large-scale ranking grids, covering extensive areas, until he locates where Google is positioning the company and, from there, refines the analysis with more specific grids.
In any case, Darren remains unconvinced that showing or hiding the address is, in fact, a ranking factor. To Darren, it seems like a bug. In all the cases he analyzed, the rankings didn't disappear; they just moved. They reverted to a previous address or ended up somewhere completely random and strange.
Apparently, he's the only one who thinks that way. Darren will get in touch when he has more information.
Presence of predefined services in GBP — position no. 22
Hawkins released new research showing that the predefined services suggested by Google in the Business Profile impact rankings. This was curious because the services were so low on the list of factors (position #81) that they were almost considered a myth in the 2023 edition.
Therefore, a new factor was added this year: “Presence of predefined services in GBP”. And, as one might imagine, it obtained a very high score, ranking 22nd among the most impactful factors.
Darren also confirmed this with his own tests. Yes, the services affect the ratings.
In December 2023, Joy Hawkins revealed, in a webinar, the existence of a new local ranking factor: whether the business is open or closed at the time of the search. The discovery had a major impact on the local SEO community.
Therefore, Darren included this factor in this year's research, and it quickly reached fifth place in impact in the ranking. In practice, this is clearly reflected: when the business is open, it can comfortably occupy the top positions; about an hour before closing, it begins to lose visibility and, when it is effectively closed, it tends to be replaced by competitors that are still in operation.
Google prioritizes displaying publicly available businesses. In sectors like retail and food, this makes sense. In others, such as residential services or law firms, the criterion can be problematic. Darren questions, for example, whether it makes sense for a law firm to become invisible simply because it is outside of business hours.
This behavior has led some companies to artificially extend their hours or hire telephone customer service to maintain their profile as "open 24 hours." Darren warns that this may be acceptable for businesses that operate exclusively by appointment, but it is inappropriate for physical establishments where customers can visit in person. Stating unrealistic hours frustrates consumers, can generate negative reviews, and violates Google's guidelines.
Here, Darren takes a personal stance. The scores indicate that removing the address from the Company Profile often results in a loss of rankings, and he acknowledges that he has seen this happen. However, he has also observed cases where the address was removed and the rankings remained exactly the same.
This raises a question: why do some companies lose all visibility by hiding their address, while others do not?
Darren says he doesn't have a definitive answer yet, but he's investigating. For now, he's working with two hypotheses:
- When a profile was originally registered at one address, then changed location and removed that address to comply with guidelines, the ratings may "revert" to the previous address. In other words, they don't disappear, they just return to the location used for the initial verification.
- In other cases, companies remove the address, lose visibility, and confirm that the displayed address was exactly the same one used for verification. These scenarios cannot be explained by a change of location, suggesting the existence of flaws in Google's system.
Darren even cites a case where Google repositioned a company more than 300 km away, in a region completely irrelevant to the business. To identify this type of error, he uses large-scale ranking grids, covering extensive areas, until he locates where Google is positioning the company and, from there, refines the analysis with more specific grids.
In any case, Darren remains unconvinced that showing or hiding the address is, in fact, a ranking factor. To Darren, it seems like a bug. In all the cases he analyzed, the rankings didn't disappear; they just moved. They reverted to a previous address or ended up somewhere completely random and strange.
Apparently, he's the only one who thinks that way. Darren will get in touch when he has more information.
Hawkins released new research showing that the predefined services suggested by Google in the Business Profile impact rankings. This was curious because the services were so low on the list of factors (position #81) that they were almost considered a myth in the 2023 edition.
Therefore, a new factor was added this year: “Presence of predefined services in GBP”. And, as one might imagine, it obtained a very high score, ranking 22nd among the most impactful factors.
Darren also confirmed this with his own tests. Yes, the services affect the ratings.
Factors that have gained importance
+75 positions — Keywords in GBP services
As already mentioned, it is now known that the "Services" section directly influences the rankings. It is therefore no surprise that this factor has risen 75 positions, moving from last place (110th) to 35th.
+64 positions — Correct time set in GBP
As explained earlier, the schedule set in the profile can significantly affect rankings. Therefore, experts have started to assign much more weight to this factor, which has risen from 85th to 21st position.
+32 positions — Store visits tracked by Android or Google Maps
This factor rose from 73rd to 41st position. Darren admits that this made him raise an eyebrow. Still, it's plausible that Google is improving location tracking via mobile devices and assigning greater weight to in-person traffic as a ranking signal. It makes sense.
+14 positions — Number of engagement signals in GBP
This factor rose from 48th to 34th place — and Darren likes that. He believes Google is increasingly relying on user behavior signals: people who interact with your profile, view photos, read reviews, watch videos, and follow posts clearly contribute to better rankings.
This is yet another reason to keep your profile active and updated. Offer interesting content to generate interaction, and the algorithm tends to reward you. Even better: this also generates more conversions.
As already mentioned, it is now known that the "Services" section directly influences the rankings. It is therefore no surprise that this factor has risen 75 positions, moving from last place (110th) to 35th.
As explained earlier, the schedule set in the profile can significantly affect rankings. Therefore, experts have started to assign much more weight to this factor, which has risen from 85th to 21st position.
This factor rose from 73rd to 41st position. Darren admits that this made him raise an eyebrow. Still, it's plausible that Google is improving location tracking via mobile devices and assigning greater weight to in-person traffic as a ranking signal. It makes sense.
This factor rose from 48th to 34th place — and Darren likes that. He believes Google is increasingly relying on user behavior signals: people who interact with your profile, view photos, read reviews, watch videos, and follow posts clearly contribute to better rankings.
This is yet another reason to keep your profile active and updated. Offer interesting content to generate interaction, and the algorithm tends to reward you. Even better: this also generates more conversions.
Factors that have lost importance
-65 positions — Internal links from the main page linked to GBP
Think about the page to which you direct the link from your Company Profile. This is usually the homepage or, for businesses with multiple locations, a location page. This page needs to be well-structured, optimized, and receive many links—both external and internal.
But how much does it matter which pages you link from it? Much less. That's why this factor dropped from 45th to 110th place. Makes sense.
-64 positions — Links to thematically relevant authority websites
There is a relatively common recommendation to link to authoritative websites from the main service pages. For example, a page about heater repair might include a link to the U.S. Department of Energy.
Does this help? It might even help credibility, but apparently local research experts consider this factor less relevant for ranking than before. It fell from 113th to 177th position.
-40 positions — Volume of content on service pages
You know those 10,000-word blog posts telling the story of grandma's apple pie before even getting to the recipe? Don't do that. People just want the recipe.
It's 2026, and huge pages are no longer trendy. The new standard is clear, concise, and high-quality content that quickly answers user questions. Get straight to the point.
This also helps with AI research. Just like people, robots don't want to read fluff.
Think about the page to which you direct the link from your Company Profile. This is usually the homepage or, for businesses with multiple locations, a location page. This page needs to be well-structured, optimized, and receive many links—both external and internal.
But how much does it matter which pages you link from it? Much less. That's why this factor dropped from 45th to 110th place. Makes sense.
There is a relatively common recommendation to link to authoritative websites from the main service pages. For example, a page about heater repair might include a link to the U.S. Department of Energy.
Does this help? It might even help credibility, but apparently local research experts consider this factor less relevant for ranking than before. It fell from 113th to 177th position.
You know those 10,000-word blog posts telling the story of grandma's apple pie before even getting to the recipe? Don't do that. People just want the recipe.
It's 2026, and huge pages are no longer trendy. The new standard is clear, concise, and high-quality content that quickly answers user questions. Get straight to the point.
This also helps with AI research. Just like people, robots don't want to read fluff.
Quotes are back!
Citations as a local SEO strategy had been losing importance in the last decade, but AI-powered SEO is giving them a new lease on life. Three of the top five visibility factors in AI-powered searches are citation factors.
In AI, mentions have become the new link.
How to get listed on Local Services Ads (LSA)
In the categories where Local Services Ads are present, they dominate the top of the SERP and capture a large portion of the clicks that previously went to the local package and organic results. Google has done an excellent job of making these ads as attractive as the local package.
Darren has clients in the personal injury field who, despite excellent results in both local and organic outcomes, generate approximately 70% of their cases through LSAs (Low-Level Laser Therapy).
If you operate in a competitive industry that displays this type of ad, you need to learn how to set up and optimize these accounts. Fortunately, many local search experts have already extensively tested what works.
The four main factors are:
- Budget and bids
- Reviews
- Selection of services
- Response time
Darren adds a nuance to the "reviews": yes, ratings and volume matter, but, just as with local SEO, the recency of reviews has proven to be a determining factor in improving visibility on LSAs.
"Title tag length" is an SEO myth
A new factor was added to the search: "title tag length". Darren was pleased to see that it appeared near the bottom of the list, low enough to be considered a myth.
For those who still insist on this: the title tag length is an SEO myth. You don't need to worry about keeping titles to 60 characters. This recommendation arose solely based on the display limit in search results, not on algorithm criteria.
Google doesn't care about title length. On the contrary: longer titles can help with ranking by including more relevant terms.
In practice, Darren usually places the most engaging text at the beginning to encourage clicks, and adds strategic keywords at the end, even if they don't appear in full on the SERPs.
Don't ignore the "Questions and Answers with Experts" section
Everyone likes graphs and rankings, but there are real gems in the open-ended questions section. One example is this observation by Claudia Tomina:
"The real-time data from Popular Times has a measurable impact on rankings. If a place is busier than usual, there's a good chance it will also be better positioned at that moment."
This year, Darren added three new open-ended questions:
- Beyond traditional SEO work, what are you doing to influence visibility in AI-powered searches?
- How has your perception of citations changed in the last year?
- How do you see the future of local research?
Do yourself a favor: read this section. It's well worth it.
The future of local research
Have you tried Google's AI Mode yet? For Darren, it offers a clear glimpse into the future of local search. Traditional results are likely to be replaced by AI-generated answers. The "AI Overviews" show that Google is already testing this path; the next step is to integrate ads sustainably.
What does this change in your SEO strategy? The good news is that if you're already doing a good job, you won't need to change everything. In addition to traditional GBP and website optimization, here are some additional actions Darren recommends:
- Seeking inclusion in "best in industry" lists compiled by experts.
- Ensure your presence in the main industry directories (tip: ask ChatGPT or Gemini which ones are the most relevant).
- Completely populate and optimize these listings.
- Optimize the description with a strong semantic structure right from the first sentence.
- Collect reviews from the main industry websites, not just Google.
- Maintain a testimonials page on the website and link it to the main navigation.
- Work on the website content so that it is:
- geared towards real user questions,
- well-structured semantically,
- Concise, direct, confident, and factual.
- Search for local mentions:
- to get involved with the community,
- writing opinion articles for regional media outlets,
- Collaborate with local content creators.
Darren also recommends reviewing the visibility factors in AI-powered searches and the responses from the expert section.
These are some of the main highlights he observed, but this is a broad study with a lot of data. Analyze everything and let me know if you find anything interesting.
A big thank you to all the local research experts who took the time to respond to the survey and share their knowledge with the community.
Local package classification factors / Maps
Here are all the ranking factors, organized by contributors according to their impact on local package and Google Maps results.
Local organic classification factors
Below are the ranking factors, ordered by experts according to their impact on local organic results.
Visibility factors in AI research
This section lists all visibility factors ranked by contributors according to their impact on responses generated by AI-based search engines.
Ranking factors in LSA (Local Service Ads)
Here are the ranking factors organized by experts according to their influence on the positioning of Local Service Ads (LSAs).
Conversion factors
Ranking well is important, but not enough. It's also crucial to evaluate how your digital presence, Google Business Profile, website, and other assets convert visitors into customers.
Is the communication clear? Is the value proposition evident? Is there a concrete reason for the user to choose your company among so many alternatives?
This section brings together all the factors classified by contributors according to their direct impact on conversions.
Myths about local SEO
These are the factors that received the lowest combined scores. In other words, they are the elements that most experts consider to have little or no real impact on local rankings.
Negative factors
This section lists the factors that should be avoided in local SEO strategies, as they harm visibility and performance in search results.
Risk factors for suspension
This section outlines the factors most likely to result in the suspension of a Business Profile on Google, seriously compromising the brand's local presence.
Expert collaborators
The following are the experts who contributed to this edition. They are leading professionals in local SEO, strategists who work on the front lines, testing hypotheses, conducting research, producing content, and sharing, with technical depth, what truly leads companies to the top of Google's local search results.



