Digital lead aggregators and direct campaigns are structurally different acquisition strategies — and that difference shows up in how you measure them. Aggregators like LegalMatch, Martindale, or FindLaw sell you leads from a shared pool. Direct campaigns like Google Ads or Facebook Ads generate leads exclusively for your firm. Both approaches can work. Comparing them fairly requires measuring both on the same metric: cost per signed case.
This guide walks through exactly how to track cost per case from each source type, where the measurement differences lie, and how to build a comparison that gives you an honest view of which approach delivers better economics.
Related guide: See our definitive guide to cost per case for PI firms — calculation formula, benchmarks by firm size and lead source, and step-by-step tracking methodology.
Related guide: See our complete guide to evaluating PI lead vendors — the 7 metrics that define vendor quality and how to build a vendor scorecard.
Why Cost Per Lead Is the Wrong Comparison Metric
The most common mistake PI marketing directors make when comparing aggregators to direct campaigns is using cost per lead as the benchmark. It's the number that shows up on every invoice and in every vendor conversation, so it becomes the default metric.
But cost per lead is a terrible comparison metric between these two channel types. Aggregator leads are typically shared (the same lead goes to 3–5 firms), pre-screened to varying degrees, and priced at a fixed rate per lead. Direct campaign leads are exclusive, vary widely in quality depending on targeting and creative, and are priced by the click rather than the lead. A $150 aggregator lead and a $150 equivalent cost per lead from Google Ads are not the same product, and the cost per lead masks that difference entirely.
Cost per signed case collapses all of those differences into a single number that is directly comparable across both channel types.
Tracking Cost Per Case From Aggregators
Aggregators are generally the easier side of this comparison to measure, because their billing is predictable and their lead delivery is already tracked in your intake system.
Step 1: Tag Every Aggregator Lead at Intake
Your intake system needs a consistent source code for each aggregator you use. “Aggregator” is not precise enough if you use multiple. Tag each one separately — “LegalMatch,” “Martindale,” “Nolo,” etc. This granularity matters when you want to compare aggregators against each other, not just against direct campaigns as a group.
Step 2: Connect Intake Tags to Case Outcomes
Pull a report from your case management system showing signed cases in the measurement period, filtered by aggregator source codes. This is the signed case count you'll use in your cost per case calculation. A 90-day rolling window gives you enough volume to be meaningful without the 6–18 month lag that settlement data requires.
Step 3: Calculate Aggregator Cost Per Case
Total aggregator spend (rolling 90 days) ÷ signed cases attributed to that aggregator = cost per case. Run this calculation separately for each aggregator you use. You will almost certainly find meaningful differences between vendors that look similar on a per-lead basis.
Example: Aggregator A sends 40 leads per month at $200 each ($24,000 per quarter) and produces 8 signed cases — a $3,000 cost per case. Aggregator B sends 60 leads per month at $175 each ($31,500 per quarter) and produces 14 signed cases — a $2,250 cost per case. Aggregator B wins on cost per case despite the higher lead count and lower per-lead price. The lead count and CPL comparison would not have surfaced that insight.
Tracking Cost Per Case From Direct Campaigns
Direct campaigns are harder to measure accurately because the spend data, the lead data, and the case data live in three different places and must be reconciled manually or through integration.
Step 1: Import Campaign Spend Data
Pull your actual spend from Google Ads, Facebook Ads, or whatever direct campaign platforms you use. Match the date range to your intake and case data. Include all spend — search, display, remarketing — not just the campaigns you think are generating PI cases directly.
Step 2: Tag Direct Campaign Leads at Intake
This is where direct campaigns get messier than aggregators. Direct campaign leads arrive through your website form, a landing page, or a tracked phone number. Your intake team needs to know the source of each lead — and that requires either UTM tracking on your forms, call tracking tied to campaign-specific phone numbers, or both.
Without source tracking on direct campaign leads, you cannot isolate how many leads came from Google Ads versus organic search versus your website's general traffic. The source tagging infrastructure for direct campaigns is more complex to build than for aggregators, but it is the prerequisite for any meaningful measurement.
Step 3: Calculate Direct Campaign Cost Per Case
Total direct campaign spend (rolling 90 days) ÷ signed cases attributed to direct campaigns = cost per case. If you are running multiple direct campaigns (Google Search, Google Display, Facebook, Instagram), calculate separately by campaign type to identify which specific campaigns drive your signed cases.
The Head-to-Head Comparison That Actually Matters
With cost per case calculated for both channel types, the comparison is straightforward — but it requires a few nuances to be honest.
Adjust for Lead Exclusivity
Aggregator leads are shared with competing firms. That creates urgency and response time pressure that direct campaign leads do not have. If your intake team converts aggregator leads at a lower rate than direct campaign leads, part of that gap may be the competitive dynamic, not lead quality. Factor that in when interpreting the conversion data.
Adjust for Case Type Mix
Direct campaigns targeting high-intent keywords (“truck accident attorney near me”) often attract different case types than aggregator leads, which may skew toward softer injuries or less-motivated claimants. If your direct campaign cases settle at higher average values, a higher cost per case may still represent better overall economics.
Adjust for Volume Constraints
Aggregators give you predictable lead volume. Direct campaigns can scale up or down based on budget changes, but they also have ceiling constraints in your market — there are only so many PI-related searches in your geography per month. When comparing the two channels, consider which one can actually absorb more budget if you want to grow case volume.
| Factor | Aggregators | Direct Campaigns | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lead Exclusivity | Shared (3–5 firms) | Exclusive to your firm | |
| Pricing Model | Fixed per lead | Per click / impression | |
| Attribution Complexity | Easier — clear invoices | Harder — needs UTM/call tracking | |
| Volume Scalability | Predictable, capped | Flexible but market-limited | |
| Case Type Control | Limited | Full control via targeting |
Common Measurement Mistakes to Avoid
- Comparing on a single-month snapshot: One month is not enough volume for either channel type. Use a 90-day rolling window.
- Excluding agency fees from direct campaign costs:If you pay an agency 10–15% of your Google Ads spend to manage campaigns, that fee belongs in your cost per case calculation. Most firms exclude it and undercount their direct campaign cost.
- Not accounting for shared leads in aggregator conversion rates:If 60% of the leads an aggregator sends have already signed with another firm before you call, your conversion rate will be artificially low and your cost per case will be inflated. Track “already represented” as a specific rejection reason to isolate this.
- Using the same attribution window for both channels:Aggregator leads often have faster intake cycles because the prospect is actively shopping. Direct campaign leads — especially from display or Facebook — may take longer to convert. Using a fixed 30-day attribution window may undercount direct campaign performance.
What to Do Once You Have the Numbers
The goal of this comparison is not to declare a winner between aggregators and direct campaigns. It is to give you the data to allocate budget intelligently across both — and to identify specific underperformers within each category.
A firm running $50,000 per month across four aggregators and $75,000 per month in Google Ads should know the cost per case for each of those five channels. That's the table that makes budget allocation a data-driven decision rather than a gut call.
If you're managing multiple aggregators and direct campaigns, RevenueScale's cost per case dashboard compares all of them in a single view — connecting your spend data, intake records, and case outcomes across every channel without the 15-hour monthly data reconciliation.