# Finance and legal

24 Schema.org types sit in finance and legal and ten of them are on fewer than a thousand websites. Each term carries the parent type that placed it there.

> Source: https://eduarddziak.com/structured-data/industries/finance-and-legal/
> Snapshot: July 2026
> Updated: 2026-08-19
> Data: /data/schema-stats.json and /data/explorer.json
> Licence: Apache 2.0, credit requested

## Summary

| Measure | Value |
| --- | --- |
| Types in this industry | 24 |
| On 100,000 websites or more | 1 |
| On fewer than 1,000 websites | 10 |
| Share under 1,000 websites | 41.67% |
| Rich results Google documents | 0 |
| Snapshot | July 2026 |

## What you can mark up

The websites column is a band, not a count, because Google publishes six ranges and not the figure inside one. The last column names the ancestor that put a term into finance and legal, which is the difference between a derivation and a guess. A term that is one of this industry's own roots names itself there. It is also why a type such as Dentist lands in medical and health and not in local business, even though it is honestly both. I made that call once, in the ordering, and it applies to your type the same way.

| Term | Websites | Movement | Placed by |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| [MonetaryAmount](https://schema.org/MonetaryAmount) | 100K - 1M | No change | MonetaryAmount |
| [AccountingService](https://schema.org/AccountingService) | 10K - 100K | No change | FinancialService |
| [Attorney](https://schema.org/Attorney) | 10K - 100K | No change | LegalService |
| [FinancialProduct](https://schema.org/FinancialProduct) | 10K - 100K | No change | FinancialProduct |
| [FinancialService](https://schema.org/FinancialService) | 10K - 100K | No change | FinancialService |
| [InsuranceAgency](https://schema.org/InsuranceAgency) | 10K - 100K | No change | FinancialService |
| [LegalService](https://schema.org/LegalService) | 10K - 100K | No change | LegalService |
| [BankOrCreditUnion](https://schema.org/BankOrCreditUnion) | 1K - 10K | No change | FinancialService |
| [CreditCard](https://schema.org/CreditCard) | 1K - 10K | No change | FinancialProduct |
| [Legislation](https://schema.org/Legislation) | 1K - 10K | No change | Legislation |
| [LegislationObject](https://schema.org/LegislationObject) | 1K - 10K | No change | Legislation |
| [LoanOrCredit](https://schema.org/LoanOrCredit) | 1K - 10K | No change | FinancialProduct |
| [Notary](https://schema.org/Notary) | 1K - 10K | No change | LegalService |
| [PaymentService](https://schema.org/PaymentService) | 1K - 10K | No change | FinancialProduct |
| [AutomatedTeller](https://schema.org/AutomatedTeller) | < 1K | No change | FinancialService |
| [BankAccount](https://schema.org/BankAccount) | < 1K | No change | FinancialProduct |
| [BrokerageAccount](https://schema.org/BrokerageAccount) | < 1K | No change | FinancialProduct |
| [CurrencyConversionService](https://schema.org/CurrencyConversionService) | < 1K | No change | FinancialProduct |
| [DepositAccount](https://schema.org/DepositAccount) | < 1K | No change | FinancialProduct |
| [InvestmentFund](https://schema.org/InvestmentFund) | < 1K | No change | FinancialProduct |
| [InvestmentOrDeposit](https://schema.org/InvestmentOrDeposit) | < 1K | No change | FinancialProduct |
| [Invoice](https://schema.org/Invoice) | < 1K | No change | Invoice |
| [MortgageLoan](https://schema.org/MortgageLoan) | < 1K | No change | FinancialProduct |
| [PaymentCard](https://schema.org/PaymentCard) | < 1K | No change | FinancialProduct |

## What Google documents

Finance and legal is one of four of the thirteen industries Google documents no rich result for, and between them those four hold 187 vocabulary terms. Google documents rich results for what it chooses to show in search, and those choices are not spread evenly across what Schema.org describes. I do not read that as a reason to skip the markup. A search result is only one of the things that reads a page, and for your site it may not be the one that matters most.

## What almost nobody does yet

Ten of the 24 types here sit in Google's smallest band, meaning fewer than a thousand websites use them. Almost nobody has tried these. There is no common implementation to copy, and no way to tell from adoption alone whether the silence is an opening or a lack of interest. What the band does tell you is that very few examples of the term exist for anything to learn from, so a rare type is a bet, not a safe default. If one of them is exactly your business, I would still write it, and expect to be the example others copy.

| Term | Movement | Placed by |
| --- | --- | --- |
| [AutomatedTeller](https://schema.org/AutomatedTeller) | No change | FinancialService |
| [BankAccount](https://schema.org/BankAccount) | No change | FinancialProduct |
| [BrokerageAccount](https://schema.org/BrokerageAccount) | No change | FinancialProduct |
| [CurrencyConversionService](https://schema.org/CurrencyConversionService) | No change | FinancialProduct |
| [DepositAccount](https://schema.org/DepositAccount) | No change | FinancialProduct |
| [InvestmentFund](https://schema.org/InvestmentFund) | No change | FinancialProduct |
| [InvestmentOrDeposit](https://schema.org/InvestmentOrDeposit) | No change | FinancialProduct |
| [Invoice](https://schema.org/Invoice) | No change | Invoice |
| [MortgageLoan](https://schema.org/MortgageLoan) | No change | FinancialProduct |
| [PaymentCard](https://schema.org/PaymentCard) | No change | FinancialProduct |

## How this is measured

I sort all of Google's 937 classes into an industry by walking their parent types through Schema.org's own hierarchy, then read the terms' adoption from Google's July 2026 usage file. Finance and legal holds 24 of those classes. None of that grouping comes from matching a name. That matters more than it sounds, because my first attempt did match names and produced entirely plausible counts that were guesses. If you regroup the classes yourself and land a type on a different page, the ancestor column is where we would disagree.

Two kinds of claim sit side by side on these pages and they are not equally strong. A type reaches its industry one way. By ancestry through rdfs:subClassOf, never by name. Each assignment records the ancestor that produced it. A Google rich result feature is a page on Google's website, not a Schema.org type, so it has no parent to walk and it reaches its industry another way. One recorded judgement per feature, its primary Schema.org type, then assigned by the same ancestry walk. You can check those judgments against Google's own documentation, because the features carry the addresses of the pages they came from.

That walk reads an ordered list of industries, most specific first, because LocalBusiness is a subclass of both Organization and Place and the three cannot all be industries. A type takes the first industry it matches on the way up, so it lands on one page and not on three. The assignment keeps the ancestor that won. I show that ancestor beside the term on the industry pages, so you can see why a type sits where it does and disagree with me if you want to.

The adoption figures here are bands, not counts. Google sorts the terms into six bands and publishes nothing inside them, so a term you can see on somewhere between one and ten million websites has no public exact number, on this page or anywhere else. A longer list of types does not mean a bigger industry in the economy either. These figures count vocabulary terms, not businesses or websites.

Analysis © Eduard Dziak, licensed under the Apache License 2.0. Please credit eduarddziak.com with a link. Source data: Google and the Schema.org community, Schema.org usage statistics dataset. Rich result requirements: Google Search Central, licensed CC BY 4.0. Term descriptions: Schema.org, licensed CC BY-SA 3.0, each term linking to its own page. Crawl counts: HTTP Archive Web Almanac, licensed Apache License 2.0.