Logo Types: A Complete Guide to Brand Mark Classification
Discover the different types of logos (logotype, symbol, combination mark, and more) and understand the most rigorous brand mark classification. We debunk the 'imagotype' myth and provide the keys to choosing the right type of graphic mark for any project.
In this guide you will find:
What Are Logo Types or Graphic Marks?
The classification of logos, technically known as brand mark typology, is a system that organizes graphic marks according to their structure. It is not an aesthetic classification, but an analytical tool that allows designers to understand the performance of each type of sign and make well-founded strategic decisions.
Why Is It Important to Know the Types of Logos?
Having a rigorous classification is essential to overcome subjectivity in design. It allows the professional and the client to have a dialogue based on technical grounds. A precise classification helps to:
- Diagnose: Correctly evaluate the structure of an existing brand during a brand audit.
- Plan: Define during the brand strategy phase which type of logo is most suitable for the project's needs.
- Justify: Justify design decisions based on the functional performance of each typology.
The Classification of the 6 Types of Logos
Faced with multiple incomplete classifications circulating on the internet (often with misinterpreted terms like "imagotype"), at FOROALFA, we adopt the typology developed by Norberto Chaves, Raúl Belluccia, and Luciano Cassisi. This model stands out for its rigor and practical utility. The main types of logos according to this classification are detailed below.
1. Logotype
This is a brand mark composed exclusively of the typographic representation of the name. It includes no additional elements, only letters. Examples: Google, Zara, FedEx.
2. Logotype with Symbol
The name (logotype) and a non-verbal graphic sign (symbol) coexist separately but are interrelated. The symbol can identify the brand on its own. Examples: Adidas, Nike, Santander.
3. Combination Mark
Here, the logotype and the symbol are fused into a single, inseparable graphic unit. They cannot function separately. Examples: Burger King, BMW, Lays.
4. Symbol Only
Brands that are identified solely through a non-verbal sign. This is a very rare type and is only viable for brands with extremely high recognition. Examples: Apple, Nike, Shell.
5. Logotype with Accessory
A minor graphic element (accessory) is integrated with the logotype but does not have the ability to identify the brand on its own. Examples: Amazon (the smile), Accenture (>).
6. Logotype with Background
The name is inscribed within a shape or graphic background that acts as a container. Examples: UPS, Ford (with its oval).
Comparison Chart of Logo Types
To facilitate the strategic choice, here is a summary of the characteristics, advantages, and disadvantages of each brand mark type.
| Brand Mark Type | Components | Key Advantages | Strategic Disadvantages |
|---|---|---|---|
| Logotype | Text only | Focus on the name, timeless, less pretentious | Less visual impact, requires good naming |
| Logotype with Symbol | Text + Symbol (separate) | Very flexible, the symbol can be used alone, memorable | Requires more space when applying the full lockup, harder to establish |
| Combination Mark | Text + Symbol (fused) | Compact, high impact, unified. | Inflexible, difficult to adapt to very horizontal applications, like banners |
| Symbol Only | Symbol only | Maximum impact and simplicity, universal | Only for well-established brands, does not communicate the name |
| Logotype with Accessory | Text + Minor graphic | Adds personality without the issues of a full symbol | The accessory cannot be used for anything on its own; it only qualifies the name |
| Logotype with Background | Text + Container | Increases presence and legibility on complex backgrounds | Can be rigid and limit application |
How Many Types of Logos Really Exist?
There is no universally agreed-upon number, as many classifications exist. However, the 6-type model we present is one of the most complete and rigorous for professional practice, as it covers the vast majority of brand mark structures in the market. More combinations exist, but these 6 mega-types allow us to distinguish the differences in terms of performance.
Does a Logo Always Need a Symbol?
Not at all. The need for a symbol is a strategic decision, not a requirement. Global brands like Google, Zara, or FedEx demonstrate the power of a pure logotype. The decision depends on factors such as the complexity of the name, the competitive context, and the brand's application needs.
What Is the Best Type of Logo for a Startup?
There is no "best type" to start with. The challenge is to project the brand's uses over time. The final choice must stem from the brand strategy.
Common Mistakes: The "Imagotype" Myth
It is common to find the term "imagotype" on blogs and social media to refer to a logotype with a symbol. This and other imprecise terms come from simplified classifications that often omit common types such as the logotype with a background or with an accessory. Using precise terminology is the first step toward a serious brand diagnosis and strategy.
How to Choose the Right Type of Logo?
Choosing the right type of brand mark is not an aesthetic decision, but a strategic response. No one type is "better" than another. The decision should be based on an analysis of factors such as the nature of the name, the competitive context, and application needs, among others. This analysis is a fundamental aspect of brand strategy.
Mastering Brand Mark Classification
Understanding and correctly applying brand mark classification is an essential skill for any professional dedicated to brand design. It allows you to substantiate decisions, dialogue with clients using technical language, and create more effective branding solutions.
For those looking for a complete immersion in the subject, we have created the Brand Mark Typology online course. It explores each mark type in depth, its performance, and how to diagnose and select the most strategic option for each project.
