Half of these aren't really our competitors.

Genuinely the same job as ours, done well. Upload a contract, get issues spotted against your own playbook, red and green risk levels, suggested redlines, a Word add-in and a chat scoped to the document. Free to try with no demo, aimed at ops, finance and fractional GCs rather than big law, with e-signature, templates and obligation tracking on top.

Less than we would like, on a feature list. The differences worth naming: they work across common-law jurisdictions broadly, from Toronto and San Francisco, where we are UK-first and score against UK contract law. We run a second enforceability score alongside the playbook score, we diff round on round, and we build your playbook from your signed contracts rather than leaving you to write the rules. They are the broader product. We only do the review.

Drafting and redlining speed for people who do it professionally. It lives in Word, it suggests language quickly, and lawyers who use it seem to like it a great deal.

Ours is aimed at the person who isn't a lawyer and has to answer anyway. The playbook is a governed, versioned artefact rather than a prompt, and every review leaves a record you can show an auditor.

Robin paired real contract AI with a managed legal team, and for a while it worked well enough to reach around $10m of recurring revenue with enterprise names on the list. The premise was sound and close to ours: most review is mechanical, so automate that and keep lawyers for the exceptions.

Robin failed to raise in October 2025 and was listed for a distressed sale, carrying around 170 staff and three offices against that revenue. Scissero took the services arm, Microsoft hired the engineers, and nobody bought the software. We are the unbundled version and intend to stay small enough to survive: priced per review, no minimum team size, no legal team on our payroll, and a human only on the one deal that earns it.

Playbook-driven review built for in-house legal teams, the closest of the in-house tools to what we do, and good at it. If you have counsel who will own the playbook, they'll feel at home.

We assume nobody owns it. Playbooks get built from your signed contracts by us, intake works by forwarding an email from someone with no seat, and a second score tells you whether a clause is even well drafted, not just whether it matches your position.

Breadth across legal work with a European posture on data and anonymisation. If you want one assistant across many legal tasks rather than one job done deeply, breadth is the point.

We do one job end to end and go deeper in it: your positions, both scores, round-on-round diffing and a real Word add-in. UK/EU residency is table stakes for us too.

Your own contracts, from template to signature, with the workflow around them. In-house teams who mostly issue paper get a lot done in it.

Different end of the same deal. They're strongest on paper you originate; we're for paper you receive. Several customers run both and hand the signed version over to the CLM.

Lifecycle infrastructure at enterprise scale, repository, approvals, obligations, integrations, the lot. Nothing we build competes with that and nothing we build tries to.

We're a reviewer, not a system of record, and we're priced and deployed accordingly. Our API exists partly so a CLM can call us for the negotiation part and keep everything else.

Reading enormous quantities of documents and finding the pattern, diligence, portfolio reviews, migrations. Serious technology aimed at serious volume.

Different shape of buyer. A five-person team can be live in a week on a package sized for them, and the review is opinionated about your positions rather than neutral about the corpus.

Signature, and everything that hangs off it. It's the default for a reason, and it's usually already in the building before anyone asks about review.

We work before the signature, the part where the terms are still changeable. Send it to them once we've told you what to push back on.

Judgement, accountability and the ability to advise, which is not what we do and not what we claim. For anything genuinely contentious or bet-the-company, this is the right answer.

We're the first pass on the routine ninety per cent, at a fraction of the cost and in minutes rather than days, so the hours you do buy go on the deals that deserve them.