# DraftPilot vs Spellbook vs Harvey vs Ivo vs Legora: an honest 2026 comparison

An honest, side-by-side comparison of DraftPilot, Spellbook, Harvey, Ivo and Legora for AI contract review and redlining. Pricing, Microsoft Word fit, playbooks, security and best-fit buyer for each.

The AI contract review market got crowded fast. By the end of 2025, the Association of Corporate Counsel reported that legal-AI adoption inside corporates had jumped from 23% to 52% in a single year. If you're an in-house lawyer or general counsel weighing up a tool right now, the choice usually narrows to a short list: **Spellbook, Harvey, Ivo, Legora — and DraftPilot.**

This is an honest head-to-head. We obviously have a horse in the race, so we've tried to be fair: where a competitor is genuinely the better fit, we say so.

## TL;DR — pick by buyer profile

| If you are… | Best fit | Why |
| --- | --- | --- |
| A solo GC or small in-house team that lives in Word | **DraftPilot** | Lowest seat minimum, 3-minute setup, full-document redlines, custom playbooks generated by AI. |
| A large law firm doing complex transactional drafting | **Spellbook** or **Harvey** | Spellbook for clause-by-clause Word drafting; Harvey for broader research + drafting workflows. |
| A mid-to-large in-house team that wants Word-native review *and* a contract-data layer | **Ivo** | Word add-in plus portfolio-wide contract intelligence; enterprise-priced. |
| A firm doing M&A diligence or large-scale tabular review | **Legora** | Built for extracting structured data across thousands of documents. |
| A multinational legal team standardising playbooks | **DraftPilot** | Cross-language redlining (58+ languages) plus AI-generated playbooks from your own templates. |

## How each tool actually works

### DraftPilot

DraftPilot is a Microsoft Word add-in built specifically for in-house legal teams. It reviews a contract end-to-end against a playbook, drops in tracked-change redlines you can accept or tweak, and writes a comment bubble explaining each edit. Playbooks can be generated by AI from your own template contracts in an afternoon — what most CLM rollouts treat as a quarter-long project.

**Pricing:** $1,800/user/year (Individual) up to $3,000/user/year (Pro). No 10-seat minimum. ([See pricing →](/pricing))

**Best for:** In-house teams that want to start in days, not quarters; multinationals that need cross-language redlining; anyone who refuses to leave Microsoft Word.

### Spellbook

Spellbook is the best-known Word-native drafting assistant, popular with transactional law firms. Strong clause suggestions, cross-reference management and a benchmark library covering 2,300+ contract types.

**Trade-offs:** Spellbook works clause-by-clause rather than reviewing a full agreement end-to-end, which makes it slower for in-house teams that need a single pass over an entire third-party paper. Pricing has risen sharply: enterprise tiers reportedly land around **$350/user/month** in late-2025 quotes, with a 6-month minimum and quote-based pricing rather than self-serve.

**Best for:** Law firms and transactional lawyers drafting bespoke agreements clause by clause.

### Harvey

Harvey is a broad legal-AI platform — Assistant, Vault, Workflows and Deep Research — used by many of the world's largest law firms. The Word integration is newer (launched 2025) and lets you edit drafts in Word while preserving formatting.

**Trade-offs:** Harvey is purpose-built for AmLaw-100 firms and large corporates. Pricing is enterprise-only, deployment usually involves a multi-month rollout, and contract redlining is one feature in a much wider platform — not the core focus.

**Best for:** Large law firms and Fortune-500 legal departments that want one platform for research, drafting and document review.

### Ivo

Ivo raised $55M in 2025 and ships three products: Ivo Review (playbook-based redlining inside Word), Ivo Intelligence (portfolio-wide contract analytics) and Ivo Assistant (prompt-based drafting). Strong story for in-house teams that want both review and a data layer over their executed contracts.

**Trade-offs:** Aimed at the enterprise end of the in-house market. Onboarding involves more configuration than a pure Word add-in, and pricing is quote-based.

**Best for:** Mid-to-large in-house teams that want Word-native review *and* searchable intelligence across an existing contract portfolio.

### Legora

Legora is built for *bulk* legal work — its core strength is **Tabular Review**, which turns thousands of documents into a structured grid for M&A diligence, compliance reviews and portfolio analysis.

**Trade-offs:** **$3,000 per user per year, 10-seat minimum** ($30K floor). The platform shines on diligence projects but is less practical for day-to-day single-contract review. The Word add-in is rule-based rather than the primary surface.

**Best for:** Law firms running M&A diligence and corporates running compliance reviews across large document sets.

## Feature comparison matrix

| Capability | DraftPilot | Spellbook | Harvey | Ivo | Legora |
| --- | :---: | :---: | :---: | :---: | :---: |
| Microsoft Word add-in | Yes (primary surface) | Yes (primary surface) | Yes (newer) | Yes | Yes (secondary) |
| End-to-end full-document redlines | Yes | Clause-by-clause | Yes | Yes | Limited |
| AI-generated custom playbooks | Yes | Manual + library | Workflow-based | Yes | Rule-based |
| Built for in-house teams (vs law firms) | Yes | Law firm | Law firm + enterprise | Yes | Both |
| Self-serve trial | Yes (2 weeks) | Yes (14 days) | No | No | No |
| Seat minimum | 1 | Quote-based | Enterprise | Enterprise | 10 |
| Cross-language redlining (58+ languages) | Yes | Limited | Yes | Limited | Limited |
| Portfolio / tabular review across many docs | Roadmap | No | Yes (Vault) | Yes (Intelligence) | Yes (core) |
| Independent third-party validation | Axiom (60% time saving) | Customer logos | Customer logos | Customer logos | Customer logos |
| SOC 2 Type II + ISO 27001 | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |

## How to choose

A useful framing is what corporate-legal buyers in 2026 are calling **time to closure** — how fast a contract gets from first draft to signature without breaking something along the way. Three questions narrow the field quickly:

1. **Where do your lawyers actually do the work?** If it's Word, you want a Word-native tool: DraftPilot, Spellbook, Ivo or Harvey's add-in. If you're already deep in a CLM, an integration layer matters more.
2. **Do you need to review *full* contracts or *draft clauses*?** Full-contract review favours DraftPilot and Ivo. Bespoke clause-by-clause drafting favours Spellbook and Harvey.
3. **What's your team size and budget tolerance?** Solo and small in-house teams will struggle with the seat minimums on Legora, Ivo and Harvey enterprise plans. DraftPilot starts at one user.

## Where DraftPilot wins

- **Time to value:** Self-serve trial in minutes, no 10-seat minimum, no integration project. Axiom evaluated eight vendors and chose DraftPilot to power its Tech+Talent initiative — independent testing showed up to **60% faster contract reviews**. ([Read the case study →](/case-studies/axiom))
- **Playbooks without the project:** AI can generate a usable playbook from your own template contracts in an afternoon.
- **Cross-language:** Review a Spanish contract using an English playbook and DraftPilot will redline in Spanish. Useful if your legal team is regional.
- **Honest pricing:** Listed online; starts at $1,800/user/year. ([See pricing →](/pricing))

## Where DraftPilot is *not* the right answer

- If your primary use case is **M&A diligence over thousands of documents**, look hard at Legora's Tabular Review.
- If you're an AmLaw-100 firm wanting **one platform for research, drafting and review**, Harvey is the broader fit.
- If you're a **law firm doing bespoke transactional drafting clause by clause**, Spellbook's library and benchmarks are deep.

We'd rather you pick the right tool than the wrong one — but if you are an in-house team that lives in Word, [book a 20-minute demo](/request-demo) and we'll show you the same workflow Axiom evaluated.