eDiscovery Statistics 2024 - Everything You Need to Know

Are you looking to add eDiscovery to your arsenal of tools? Maybe for your business or personal use only, whatever it is – it’s always a good idea to know more about the most important eDiscovery statistics of 2024.

My team and I scanned the entire web and collected all the most useful eDiscovery stats on this page. You don’t need to check any other resource on the web for any eDiscovery statistics. All are here only 🙂

How much of an impact will eDiscovery have on your day-to-day? or the day-to-day of your business? Should you invest in eDiscovery? We will answer all your eDiscovery related questions here.

Please read the page carefully and don’t miss any word. 🙂

On this page, you’ll learn about the following:

Best eDiscovery Statistics

Best eDiscovery Statistics

☰ Use “CTRL+F” to quickly find statistics. There are total 98 eDiscovery Statistics on this page 🙂

eDiscovery Market Statistics

The most challenging landscape for the eDiscovery industry is North America, with 63% of professionals placing an emphasis on this market. ^[0]
The next challenging market for the industry is China, with 13% of professionals emphasizing the market. ^[0]
According to the Facts & Factors report, the global eDiscovery market size & share will reach USD 24.12 billion by 2026 Here are some interesting facts about the eDiscovery showing the importance of the topic for the use of technology by the legal profession. ^[1]
The combined eDiscovery software and services market spend is estimated at approximately $11.23B in 2019 and estimated to grow at a Compound Annual Growth Rate of approximately 12.93% to $20.63B in 2024. ^[2]
eDiscovery software market spend is estimated at approximately $3.39B in 2019 (30.19% of the total market) and estimated to grow at a Compound Annual Growth Rate of approximately 13.05% to $6.26B in 2024 (30.36% of the total market). ^[2]
eDiscovery services market spend is estimated at approximately $7.84B in 2019 (69.81% of the total market) and estimated to grow at a Compound Annual Growth Rate of approximately 12.88% to $14.37B (69.64% of the total market). ^[2]
Example Market Share Estimations for Two Hypothetical eDiscovery Providers An eDiscovery software provider with approximately $518 million in direct revenue would represent approximately 15.28% of eDiscovery software market spend in 2019. ^[2]
An eDiscovery software provider with approximately $25 million in direct revenue would represent approximately .737% of eDiscovery software market spend in 2019. ^[2]

eDiscovery Software Statistics

The combined eDiscovery software and services market spend is estimated at approximately $11.23B in 2019 and estimated to grow at a Compound Annual Growth Rate of approximately 12.93% to $20.63B in 2024. ^[2]
eDiscovery software market spend is estimated at approximately $3.39B in 2019 (30.19% of the total market) and estimated to grow at a Compound Annual Growth Rate of approximately 13.05% to $6.26B in 2024 (30.36% of the total market). ^[2]
Off Premise software spending is estimated at approximately 54% of worldwide eDiscovery software spending in 2019, with that number increasing to approximately 64% by 2024. ^[2]
The rest of the world outside of the U.S. is estimated to constitute approximately 37% of worldwide eDiscovery software and services spending in 2019, with that number increasing to approximately 42% in 2024. ^[2]
Non Governmental spending on eDiscovery is estimated to constitute approximately 52% of worldwide eDiscovery software and services spending in 2019, with that number increasing to approximately 57% by 2024. ^[2]
Example Market Share Estimations for Two Hypothetical eDiscovery Providers An eDiscovery software provider with approximately $518 million in direct revenue would represent approximately 15.28% of eDiscovery software market spend in 2019. ^[2]
An eDiscovery software provider with approximately $25 million in direct revenue would represent approximately .737% of eDiscovery software market spend in 2019. ^[2]

eDiscovery Latest Statistics

Estimated and actual eDiscovery search results Microsoft Purview Understand why estimated and actual search results may vary in searches run with eDiscovery tools in Office 365. ^[3]
68 percent of the audience said “occasionally”, 11 percent said “mostly”, 9 percent said “always” and 12 percent said “never”. ^[4]
So, 88 percent of the audience had worked remotely at least occasionally before the pandemic. ^[4]
77 percent of the audience said “6+”, 21 percent said “4 to 6” and 2 percent said “less than 3”. ^[4]
41 percent of the audience said “on several occasions”, 32 percent said “often”, 10 percent said “once” and 17 percent said “never”. ^[4]
So, 73 percent of the audience had used predictive coding related technologies at least on several occasions, which is likely much larger than the legal industry average, but not that surprising at a conference full of legal technology professionals. ^[4]
51 percent of the audience said “on several occasions”, 7 percent said “often”, 12 percent said “once” and 29 percent said “never”. ^[4]
So, at least 58 percent of the audience had used eDiscovery technology for matters not involving claims or disputes at least “on several occasions”. ^[4]
This has been an important issue in a number of e discovery cases,It is not correct to say that the margin of error is ±5% of the 5,200,000 point estimate, or ±260,000.2.3. ^[5]
The method used to create the tables is technically referred to as a “Wald approximation” that assumes an underlying population proportion of 50%. ^[5]
With a sample size of 400, the pollster could have just as accurately reported a 2% margin of error with a 57% confidence level or a 10% margin of error with a 99% confidence level. ^[5]
Using Table 2, this would imply a 95% confidence level with a margin of error of ±5%. ^[5]
The confidence range would this be calculated as from 0.78% – 5% = 4.22% to 0.78% + 5% = 5.78%, and this of course makes no sense. ^[5]
we can say that the estimated population proportion is 0.78% with a 95% confidence level and a confidence range from 0.17% to 2.32%.Notice that this confidence range is not symmetrical around 0.78%. ^[5]
(0.78% – 0.17% = 0.61% while 2.32% – 0.78% = 1.54%.). ^[5]
For example, if a set of 2,000 documents has been reviewed by a human reviewer, we might want to use sampling to develop a level of confidence that the human reviewer’s error rate is not worse than some pre established tolerance level, such as 10%. ^[5]
Our concern is that the error rate not be 10% or more. ^[5]
Since we are not concerned with the question of whether the actual rate is 2% or 3% or 5% or whatever, this enables smaller sample sizes. ^[5]
Our goal is to have a 95% confidence level that the reviewer’s error rate is less than. ^[5]
10%.This means that, if the actual error rate is 10%, there is a 95% or greater chance that the sample will have one or more errors, so that we correctly reject the sample 95% of the time. ^[5]
They further agreed that the sample should be increased, as necessary, “until the Control Set contains at least 385 relevant documents” to assure that the “error margin on recall estimates” would not exceed 5% at a 95% confidence level.[13. ^[5]
For example, if a population has a 1% prevalence rate and the documents identified as non responsive by the classifier have a 1% elusion rate, the classifier performed poorly. ^[5]
As a simple example, assume a prededuplicated population of 500,000, of which 100,000 are responsive and 400,000 are non responsive, for a 20% yield rate. ^[5]
The deduplication process removes 50,000 responsives and 350,000 non responsives, resulting in a deduplicated population of 100,000, of which 50,000 are responsive, for a 50% yield rate. ^[5]
Either answer, 20% or 50%, is correct for the associated population, but you must be explicit in defining the population. ^[5]
You cannot say that a sample of size 400 will provide a 95% confidence level with a 5% margin of error. ^[5]
You cannot say that a sample of size 400 will provide a 95% confidence level that the proportion for each outcome is within a 5% margin of error. ^[5]
is 10% in this example, and our approach is to reject the population if there are one or more defects in the samples, we will have 95% confidence of seeing one or more defects if u1 – using logarithms. ^[5]
Our goal is to find the lowest such that nHYPGEOM.DIST,N,TRUE) ≤ MaxAccUnOr, specifically in this case, with = 10%, u= 2000. ^[5]
and= 2000 andN= 5%,= 5%,MaxAccUnHYPGEOM.DIST≤. ^[5]
In the example that we have been using, what if the actual defect rate is only 1%, i.e., 20 defects in the population of 2000, and this is an acceptable rate?. ^[5]
It shows that, in the case where then= 2000,= 2000,N=10%,=10%,u=. ^[5]
The pollster who reported a 5% margin of error with a 95% confidence level on a sample size of 400 was reporting consistently with the case highlighted in green, allowing for conservative rounding. ^[5]
The highlighted combination shows that the required sample size for an exact 95% confidence level and 5% margin of error is actually 385. ^[5]
we can say that the estimated population proportion is 0.78% with a 95% confidence level and a confidence range from 0.17% to 2.32%. ^[5]
Notice that this confidence range is not symmetrical around 0.78%. ^[5]
Our goal is to have a 95% confidence level that the reviewer’s error rate is less than 10%. ^[5]
This means that, if the actual error rate is 10%, there is a 95% or greater chance that the sample will have one or more errors, so that we correctly reject the sample 95% of the time. ^[5]
For some time now, the legal profession and the courts have been embracing, or at least accepting, the use of technologies that offer the benefit of avoiding 100% human review of a corpus. ^[5]
In that year, the University of California found that 93% of all information was generated in digital formats. ^[0]
Litigation costs in 2016 were estimated to be near $20 billion. ^[0]
Only 14% believe that there will be a decrease in litigation. ^[0]
About 70% of the costs involved with the eDiscovery industry are the direct review of documentations. ^[0]
For the 5 year period ending in 2019, industry revenues are expected to grow at an annualized rate of 5.7%. ^[0]
38% of corporations have not employed new eDiscovery technologies. ^[0]
75% of Chief Information Officers within the U.S. Government say that they are not confident in the quality of their eDiscovery programs. ^[0]
49% of industry professionals say that the most significant impact of the eDiscovery process is the variety, volume, and velocity of disparate data. ^[0]
This is followed by escalating costs which are associated with the industry (42%) and regulatory activity (40%). ^[0]
51% of eDiscovery professionals say that their biggest challenge is to manage cross. ^[0]
Another 35% of professionals indicate local access issues, as their largest barrier to hurdle. ^[0]
76% of insurance carriers say that ECA was their primary litigation cost containment strategy. ^[0]
98% of professionals using ECA state that it is an effective approach. ^[0]
80% of firms within the eDiscovery industry project that there will be an average spending increase of 8.4% on culling tools. ^[0]
Another 70% say that boosting collections and holding tools, by an average of 7%, is another large expected budget increase for the next year. ^[0]
In 2013, 34% of firms used these tools. ^[0]
In 2014, 37% of firms were using ECA tools. ^[0]
57% of organizations spend at least $1 million with the eDiscovery industry every year. ^[0]
96% of litigators who work with the eDiscovery industry say that the time and date stamp within metadata is the most vital information for their cases. ^[0]
Up to 30% of the relevant information that the eDiscovery process would need to access in coming years will be stored in the cloud. ^[0]
In 2015, just 5% of information sought through eDiscovery was stored in the cloud. ^[0]
For the 5 year period ending in 2016, the industry saw annualized growth at $12.5%. ^[0]
For instance, using a 95% confidence level means that if 100 samples were taken, 95 of them would have the same or very similar results. ^[6]
For example, a 95% confidence interval with a 4 percent margin of error means that your result will be within 4 percentage points of the real population value 95% of the time. ^[6]
According to Rand Corporation, 73% of total eDiscovery cost is spent on Document Review , and TAR is definitely helpful in saving time and money without compromising the quality. ^[1]
Buried in their section on discovery, they asked respondents In the past 12 months, for what percentage of your matters have you primarily relied upon self. ^[7]
In that webcast, 62% of the attendees most feared the spoliation risks associated with custodian selfpreservation… yet in a survey of corporate counsel, 47% of organizations are relying on custodian self preservation more than ¾ of the time. ^[7]
Estimated Spending By Task. ^[2]
*** Corporations and Governments are estimated to deliver approximately 73% of worldwide eDiscovery centric services in 2019, with that number increasing to approximately 78% by 2024. ^[2]
Law Firms are estimated to deliver approximately 19% of worldwide eDiscovery centric services in 2019, with that number decreasing to approximately 9% by 2024. ^[2]
Litigation Support Service Providers are estimated to deliver approximately 8% of eDiscovery centric services in 2019, with that number increasing to approximately 13% by 2024. ^[2]
You can sample a small portion of a large set to obtain a 95% or 99% confidence level in your findings. ^[8]
You’ll simply need to identify a desired confidence level (typically 95% to 99%), an acceptable margin of error (typically 5% or less). ^[8]
If 1,000,000 files were not retrieved, you would only need to review 664 of the not retrieved files to achieve that same level of confidence (99%, with a 5% margin of error). ^[8]
On a national level, the ABA estimates that document review alone accounts for more than 80 percent of total litigation spend $42.1 billion dollars a year , and as data volumes increase, that number is only going to go up. ^[9]
In 2012, a Rand study estimated that each gigabyte costs $18,000 to produce, with up to 70 percent of costs going to documents, which would put the average case cost around $2.3 million. ^[9]
Another estimate , from the of Minnesota Journal Law, Science & Technology, puts that number closer to $1.3 million, with 94 percent of costs going to document review and processing, and a mere 6% earmarked for collection and production combined. ^[9]
Assuming that $13.1 million covered collection, processing, and production, that still leaves 70 percent of costs, or $30.5 million uncounted for, bringing the total discovery cost to a whopping $43.6 million, or $12,129 per gigabyte. ^[9]
According to Clioâs 2017 Legal Trends Report , attorneys spend up to 6 hours a day on non billable work, including administrative tasks like document collection and configuring technology. ^[9]
Even if a 1000% reduction of cost is somewhat optimistic, the savings from an effective Information Governance programme are substantial. ^[10]
An FTI survey showed that only 20% organisations have fewer than 100 litigation events in a year, while 10% reported upwards of 2000 each year. ^[10]
6.1% eDiscovery Consulting Services in the US Business Growth in 2024 5.2% e Discovery Consulting Services in the US Annualized Business Growth 2017–2024. ^[11]
There are 5,189 e Discovery Consulting Services businesses in the US as of 2024, an increase of 5.2% from 2021. ^[11]
The number of businesses in the eDiscovery Consulting Services industry in the US has grown 5.2% per year on average over the five years between 2017. ^[11]

I know you want to use eDiscovery Software, thus we made this list of best eDiscovery Software. We also wrote about how to learn eDiscovery Software and how to install eDiscovery Software. Recently we wrote how to uninstall eDiscovery Software for newbie users. Don’t forgot to check latest eDiscovery statistics of 2024.

Reference

brandongaille – https://brandongaille.com/21-ediscovery-industry-statistics-and-trends/.
knovos – https://www.knovos.com/5-undeniable-facts-about-ediscovery/.
complexdiscovery – https://complexdiscovery.com/an-ediscovery-market-size-mashup-2019-2024-worldwide-software-and-services-overview/.
microsoft – https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-365/compliance/view-keyword-statistics-for-content-search.
ediscoverytoday – https://ediscoverytoday.com/2020/08/31/here-are-some-disruptive-stats-in-discovery-ediscovery-trends/.
edrm – https://edrm.net/resources/project-guides/edrm-statistical-sampling-applied-to-electronic-discovery/.
percipient – https://percipient.co/sampling-in-electronic-discovery-and-other-legal-document-reviews/.
exterro – https://www.exterro.com/blog/examining-e-discovery-statistics-the-zombie-doctrine-of-self-preservation.
cloudnine – https://cloudnine.com/ediscoverydaily/electronic-discovery/ediscovery-best-practices-determining-appropriate-sample-size-to-test-your-search/.
logikcull – https://www.logikcull.com/blog/ediscovery-opportunity-costs-infographic.
infogovbasics – https://www.infogovbasics.com/challenges/litigation-ediscovery/.
ibisworld – https://www.ibisworld.com/industry-statistics/number-of-businesses/e-discovery-consulting-services-united-states/.

How Useful is Ediscovery

eDiscovery, or electronic discovery, is the process of identifying, collecting, and producing electronic information during the legal discovery process. In the past, discovery in legal cases involved physical documents and files, which could be time-consuming, costly, and prone to human error. With the advent of eDiscovery tools and platforms, the discovery process has been streamlined and made more efficient.

One of the most significant benefits of eDiscovery is its ability to quickly search and retrieve relevant information from a vast amount of electronic data. This can be especially useful in large-scale litigation cases where parties are required to produce thousands or even millions of documents. Gone are the days of sifting through boxes of paper files – eDiscovery tools can now quickly search and identify relevant documents based on specific keywords or criteria, saving time and resources.

Furthermore, eDiscovery can also help organizations in their day-to-day operations beyond legal matters. By implementing eDiscovery tools, businesses can better manage and organize their electronic data, making it easier to access and analyze when needed. This can lead to improved decision-making processes, enhanced data security, and overall more efficient operations.

Additionally, eDiscovery can also help organizations mitigate potential risks and ensure compliance with legal and regulatory requirements. By having a system in place to effectively manage and retain electronic information, companies can reduce the likelihood of costly legal consequences and reputational damage resulting from non-compliance or data breaches.

Despite its many benefits, some critics may argue that eDiscovery is not without its challenges. The cost of implementing eDiscovery tools and training staff on how to use them can be significant, especially for smaller organizations with limited resources. Additionally, ensuring the accuracy and completeness of electronic data during the discovery process can be complex and require specialized expertise.

Overall, the usefulness of eDiscovery cannot be understated in today’s digital age. As organizations continue to rely more on electronic data, the need for effective methods of managing and navigating this information will only increase. By leveraging eDiscovery tools and platforms, companies can streamline their operations, reduce costs, and mitigate potential risks. In conclusion, eDiscovery is not just a helpful tool for legal cases – it is a valuable asset for any organization looking to better manage their electronic information.

In Conclusion

Be it eDiscovery benefits statistics, eDiscovery usage statistics, eDiscovery productivity statistics, eDiscovery adoption statistics, eDiscovery roi statistics, eDiscovery market statistics, statistics on use of eDiscovery, eDiscovery analytics statistics, statistics of companies that use eDiscovery, statistics small businesses using eDiscovery, top eDiscovery systems usa statistics, eDiscovery software market statistics, statistics dissatisfied with eDiscovery, statistics of businesses using eDiscovery, eDiscovery key statistics, eDiscovery systems statistics, nonprofit eDiscovery statistics, eDiscovery failure statistics, top eDiscovery statistics, best eDiscovery statistics, eDiscovery statistics small business, eDiscovery statistics 2024, eDiscovery statistics 2021, eDiscovery statistics 2024 you will find all from this page. 🙂

We tried our best to provide all the eDiscovery statistics on this page. Please comment below and share your opinion if we missed any eDiscovery statistics.

eDiscovery Statistics 2024 – Everything You Need to Know