Skip to content
effecthub

Harvey vs Legora

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

Higher Trust score
Harvey — 90 vs 85 for Legora
Best fit
Harvey: AmLaw-scale firms rolling out one platform firmwide with EU or Australian data residency · Legora: Law firms reviewing large document sets in M&A, litigation or banking matters
Platforms
Harvey: Web · Legora: Web, Windows
Status
Both up at our last check (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

Side by side

FactHarveyLegora
CategoryLegal ResearchLegal Research
Pricing modelContactContact
Trust score90 / 10085 / 100
PlatformsWebWeb, Windows
CompanyHarvey AI CorporationLegora
Last verifiedSep 6, 2026Sep 6, 2026

What our research says

Harvey

Harvey is the enterprise choice for large firms and legal departments that want one vendor to cover research, review, drafting and now intake and regulatory tracking, with the security paperwork and regional hosting those buyers require. It is not something a solo practitioner or a small firm can sign up for, and the lack of any public price means the comparison with CoCounsel or Legora happens in a sales cycle, not on a pricing page.

Pros

  • Covers the whole legal workflow, from intake to agents to document vaults, rather than one point task
  • Regional instances for the US, EU and Australia address data-residency objections up front
  • Cited answers tied back to source documents and legal content, which is the minimum for legal use
  • Well capitalised: $550M raised at a $15.5B valuation in September 2026, so vendor risk is low

Cons

  • No public pricing, trial or self-serve sign-up; every evaluation runs through sales
  • Built for enterprise procurement, so mid-size and small firms pay for scale they do not use
  • No public API or developer surface found, so it does not slot into a custom stack
  • Rapid module expansion means parts of the platform are months old and lightly proven

Legora

Legora has become one of the two or three names a law firm evaluates alongside Harvey, and its edge is working where lawyers already are: a grid for review, add-ins for Word and Outlook, and agents that run a whole task rather than answer one question. It is an enterprise purchase with no public price, so solo practitioners and small firms should expect a sales process rather than a signup form.

Pros

  • Tabular Review plus Word and Outlook add-ins fit the way legal work is actually done
  • Agent mode executes multi-step tasks end to end rather than returning a single answer
  • SOC 2 Type II, ISO 27001, ISO 42001, GDPR and HIPAA listed, with 'zero AI training on your data'
  • Claims 130,000-plus users across 2,000-plus firms and in-house teams in 80-plus markets

Cons

  • No public pricing, trial or self-serve signup
  • No legal entity, address or headquarters stated on the site; the legal page only lists regional documents
  • The site's own figures disagree (2,080-plus customers and 60-plus markets in one block, 2,000-plus and 80-plus in another)
  • No public API documentation found, so integrations beyond the listed add-ins are a sales conversation

Which one fits

Choose Harvey if you need

  • AmLaw-scale firms rolling out one platform firmwide with EU or Australian data residency
  • In-house legal teams that want intake, contract review and horizon scanning in the same system
  • Legal organisations already standardised on Microsoft tooling, given the vendor's expanding collaboration there

Choose Legora if you need

  • Law firms reviewing large document sets in M&A, litigation or banking matters
  • In-house teams that want drafting help inside Word and Outlook instead of a separate chat window
  • Firms that need regional contracts and data residency across EU, UK, US and Australia

All Legora alternatives →Browse all Legal Research →