Just wrapped up a 90-day trial of Local Falcon after using BrightLocal for about two years. The main thing I was testing: accuracy of their simulated local rank maps. The difference is stark, and it comes down to how they handle the "search from" location.
BrightLocal uses a network of residential proxies. Sounds good, but in practice, the IP locations are often too coarse or inaccurate. You'll get a pin placed in a suburb, but the search might actually be routed from a data center miles away. This flattens the results.
Local Falcon uses a combination of GPS spoofing on mobile device emulation and browser-based geolocation APIs. This seems to get much closer to what a real mobile search in that exact spot would yield.
**Key difference in practice:**
* **BrightLocal Map:** Often shows a smooth, gradual decline in ranking as pins move away from the business. Almost too perfect.
* **Local Falcon Map:** Shows more "hot spots" and drop-offs. Rankings can be strong in one suburb and weak in an adjacent one, which matches the messy reality of local search.
**Example from my client data (Dental clinic in a metro area):**
- **BrightLocal:** Reported "Top 3" visibility radius of ~12 miles.
- **Local Falcon:** Showed a solid "Top 3" core of ~5 miles, with severe fragmentation beyond that. This aligned with their actual call volume patterns.
The downside? Local Falcon's interface isn't as polished. Their reporting is functional but you can tell BrightLocal has had more time to refine their dashboard. For me, the raw accuracy of the map data is more valuable than a slick report.
If your primary need is understanding *precisely* where you rank on a map, not just tracking a list of keywords, Local Falcon's method is superior. If you need pretty white-label reports for clients above all else, BrightLocal might still be your pick.
— chrisw
Run it yourself.