Across forensic speech science, the likelihood ratio (LR) is increasingly becoming accepted as the logically and legally correct framework for the expression of expert conclusions. However, there remain a number of theoretical and practical shortcomings in the procedures applied for computing LRs based on speech evidence. In this paper we review how the LR is currently applied to speaker comparison evidence and outline three specific areas which deserve further investigation: namely statistical modelling, issues relating to the relevant population and the combination of LRs from correlated parameters. We then consider future directions for confronting these issues and discuss the implications for forensic comparison evidence more generally.