Forward citations have long been treated as a shortcut for patent value: more citations = more likely to be important. But recent litigation data suggests the reality is more nuanced.

Looking at 4,300 original US utility patents over the past five years, one question stands out:

Are forward citations a reliable signal of which patents actually get asserted?

A signal, but a noisy one

On average, asserted patents are cited more often than controls — but averages hide a lot.
Some patents with very few or even zero citations still end up in litigation. Meanwhile, a tiny fraction of patents dominate the high-citation end.

This raises questions for portfolio owners:

• Are highly cited patents always worth prioritizing?
• Could low-citation patents be overlooked opportunities for enforcement leverage?

Citations ≠ enforcement readiness

High citation counts often reflect crowded technical fields or follow-on innovation — not clean infringement targets.

The key insight: enforcement readiness depends less on popularity and more on claim clarity, specification depth, family design, and acquisition history. Forward citations are just one input in a much bigger picture.

The full report dives deeper:

• Distribution of forward citations in asserted patents
• Why citation-only screens can miss enforcement-grade assets
• How portfolio design decisions amplify enforcement readiness

👉 Download the full report to see which patents really matter.

Shaping portfolios from the patent up