Clment vs Ironclad

Two fact sheets from our own research, side by side — pricing, platforms, API access and status re-checked by us rather than quoted from the vendors.

The short answer

Free plan: Clment has one; Ironclad prices on request
Public API: Both have one
Higher Trust score: Ironclad — 90 vs 74 for Clment
Best fit: Clment: Legal and ops teams wanting configurable rules rather than generic contract summaries · Ironclad: Legal ops teams at mid-size and large companies standardising contract workflow end to end
Status: Both up at our last check — Clment Sep 1, 2026, Ironclad Sep 6, 2026

From our own records as of each tool's last check. Anything we have not confirmed is left out rather than guessed. How we verify

ClmentReviews contracts against custom rulebooks, flags risky clauses, and outputs a marked-up Word file for negotiation.

IroncladContract lifecycle management with an AI assistant grounded in your own contract history

Side by side

Fact	Clment	Ironclad
Category	Contract Analysis & Review	Contract Analysis & Review
Pricing model	Freemium	Contact
Public API	Yes	Yes
Trust score	74 / 100	90 / 100
Platforms	Web, API	Web, API
Company	Contract Eagle Limited	Ironclad, Inc.
Launched	—	2014
Last verified	Sep 1, 2026	Sep 6, 2026

What our research says

Clment

Clment's custom rulebooks and citation-linked risk flags make it more configurable than a generic contract-summarizing tool, and full API/SDK parity with the web app means it can slot into an existing document pipeline. The free plan is generous enough to actually evaluate it, though real per-tier pricing is hidden until checkout.

Pros

Rules are user-defined rather than a fixed one-size checklist
Outputs a tracked-changes Word document ready for negotiation, not just a summary
Full API and SDK parity with the web app, with an OpenAPI spec published

Cons

Paid plan prices are not shown until checkout, only relative tier limits
Credit costs for different actions add a layer of complexity to predict monthly spend

Ironclad

Ironclad is a top-of-market CLM for legal teams that want contract workflow, repository and AI review in one system, and the analyst placements and $200M ARR say it is not going anywhere. It is an enterprise purchase: quote-only pricing, a real implementation, and value that depends on moving your whole contracting process into it. Small teams that just need redlining or e-signature will find it heavy.

Pros

Covers the full lifecycle from request through signature, storage, analysis and renewal in one product
AI review and the Ironclad Agent are grounded in your own contract history rather than generic playbooks
Deep integrations with Salesforce, Slack, Word, DocuSign, SAP and others, plus CLM and Clickwrap APIs
Leader placements in the 2025 Gartner Magic Quadrant and Forrester Wave for CLM

Cons

Quote-only pricing with add-ons for API access, extra instances and premium support
Implementation is a project: the pricing page itself offers legal engineers or partners to deploy it
Heavyweight for teams whose contracting needs are simple
Value depends on adoption across sales and procurement, not just legal, which is a change-management job

Which one fits

Choose Clment if you need

Legal and ops teams wanting configurable rules rather than generic contract summaries
Developers wanting to build contract review into their own workflow via API

Choose Ironclad if you need

Legal ops teams at mid-size and large companies standardising contract workflow end to end
Sales and procurement organisations that want self-serve contracts on approved templates
Companies with enough contract volume to make clause extraction and repository search pay off