Automate sales proposal generation
Turn approved content and customer requirements into proposal drafts for your sales team.
Harvey
AI tool profile ·
An AI tool built only for legal work that researches case law, reviews contracts, and analyzes large document sets for law firms and in-house teams.
90TriVista score
Category rank#1 in Legal, Contract, and Compliance AI
Baseline ELO1,591.1
Menu
At a glance
What it does
Harvey is an AI tool built only for legal work. Law firms and in-house legal teams use it to research case law, review contracts, and analyze large sets of documents. A feature called Vault handles bulk document review for due diligence, and agents can run multi-step legal tasks on their own, like drafting a first contract redline. Teams sign in with single sign-on and get audit logs and role-based access. It is made by Harvey AI, connects with document systems like iManage and NetDocuments, holds SOC 2 Type II, ISO 27001, and ISO 42001 certifications, and states it does not train its models on customer data.
Where it can help
This fits a legal team that already handles heavy contract review or litigation research; large law firms and corporate legal departments are the main users today. A good starting point is a pilot in one practice group, such as M&A or litigation, on the Vault or Contract Intelligence feature. Pricing is not public; planning estimates from legal-tech writers put enterprise deals well above $100,000 a year, with per-seat costs dropping at large scale, so treat any number as a rough estimate and ask Harvey for a live quote based on seat count and use case. The main risk is trust in AI output, since reviewers note Harvey can miss legal nuance, so staff must check citations and analysis before using them with a client; cost and contract complexity can also be a barrier for a smaller legal team.
Business Goals
Business goals to explore
Potential matches to review against your requirements. Explore matching tools or read a task guide before you choose.
Reduce procurement costs
Analyze spending, compare suppliers, and identify opportunities to improve purchasing.
Company fit
Where this tool fits best
The industries and leadership roles this tool is most often matched with.
How your company could affect the fit
How one company factor at a time moves the modeled score. The published score is unchanged.
How your company could affect the fit
How one company factor at a time moves the modeled score. The published score is unchanged.
Industry Energy and utilities Modeled score93.0 / 100 Modeled category rank#1
Baseline Consumer products
Adjusted ELO 1,608.2
Change from baseline +26.5 ELO
Industry Financial and professional services Modeled score93.0 / 100 Modeled category rank#1
Baseline Consumer products
Adjusted ELO 1,608.0
Change from baseline +26.3 ELO
Industry Healthcare and life sciences Modeled score92.8 / 100 Modeled category rank#1
Baseline Consumer products
Adjusted ELO 1,606.5
Change from baseline +24.8 ELO
Technology Maturity Low Modeled score84.8 / 100 Modeled category rank#1
Baseline Moderate
Adjusted ELO 1,558.5
Change from baseline -23.2 ELO
Industry Technology and telecommunications Modeled score91.4 / 100 Modeled category rank#1
Baseline Consumer products
Adjusted ELO 1,598.6
Change from baseline +17.0 ELO
Technology Maturity High Modeled score91.1 / 100 Modeled category rank#1
Baseline Moderate
Adjusted ELO 1,596.9
Change from baseline +15.2 ELO
Industry Construction and real estate Modeled score90.9 / 100 Modeled category rank#1
Baseline Consumer products
Adjusted ELO 1,595.1
Change from baseline +13.5 ELO
Revenue Band $100M-$500M Modeled score87.4 / 100 Modeled category rank#1
Baseline $25M-$100M
Adjusted ELO 1,574.5
Change from baseline -7.2 ELO
Industry Industrial manufacturing Modeled score89.7 / 100 Modeled category rank#1
Baseline Consumer products
Adjusted ELO 1,588.0
Change from baseline +6.3 ELO
Industry Food and beverage Modeled score89.3 / 100 Modeled category rank#1
Baseline Consumer products
Adjusted ELO 1,585.8
Change from baseline +4.1 ELO
Company Type Business services Modeled score89.3 / 100 Modeled category rank#1
Baseline Manufacturing
Adjusted ELO 1,585.5
Change from baseline +3.8 ELO
Revenue Band Under $25M Modeled score88.0 / 100 Modeled category rank#1
Baseline $25M-$100M
Adjusted ELO 1,578.2
Change from baseline -3.4 ELO
Industry Retail and distribution Modeled score89.2 / 100 Modeled category rank#1
Baseline Consumer products
Adjusted ELO 1,585.1
Change from baseline +3.4 ELO
Revenue Band $500M-$2B Modeled score89.1 / 100 Modeled category rank#1
Baseline $25M-$100M
Adjusted ELO 1,584.6
Change from baseline +3.0 ELO
Revenue Band Over $2B Modeled score88.3 / 100 Modeled category rank#1
Baseline $25M-$100M
Adjusted ELO 1,579.5
Change from baseline -2.2 ELO
Industry Automotive and transportation Modeled score88.6 / 100 Modeled category rank#1
Baseline Consumer products
Adjusted ELO 1,581.3
Change from baseline -0.4 ELO
Cost guide
What it can cost
These estimates cover licensing, setup, integrations, staff time, security, administration, and support.
| Cost measure | Low | Base | High |
|---|---|---|---|
| First-year total | $64.3K | $101.5K | $164K |
| Three-year total | $137.2K | $207.8K | $322.5K |
| First-year cost per unit | $64.3K | $101.5K | $164K |
| Average annual cost per unit (over three years) | $45.7K | $69.3K | $107.5K |
Cost breakdown by scenario
| Component | Low | Base | High |
|---|---|---|---|
| Licensing and usage | $18.8K | $25K | $33.8K |
| Implementation | $10.8K | $18K | $30.6K |
| Integration | $12.1K | $22K | $39.6K |
| Staff time and change management | $7K | $10K | $14K |
| Security | $6K | $8.5K | $12.8K |
| Administration | $4.5K | $6K | $8.1K |
| Support | $2.1K | $2.8K | $3.8K |
Estimate assumptions: This scenario uses a category-based allowance, not a verified price for this product. Based on 1 production workspace. Confirm the vendor’s billing unit and current price or quote before budgeting.
Benefits have not been estimated: The current research does not estimate potential savings, return on investment, or how long it would take to recover the cost. Earlier benefit estimates are excluded.
Get started
What you need first
What you need firstSet up the basics
Confirm current product identity, commercial packaging, data processing terms, sign-in and access rules, retention, integrations, support model, implementation effort, and rollback conditions.
How to startSet clear limits
Verify identity, package, availability, ownership, pricing, and security evidence before approving a pilot
Before you scaleSet safe working rules
Recommended next action
Do not approve a pilot yet. Verify the current product identity, package, availability, owner, pricing, and security evidence; then define one workflow, a baseline, and rollback criteria.
Decision ownerBusiness and technology owner
STARTSet a goal and owner
Define what success looks like for a test of Harvey and assign someone to lead it.
FIRST MONTHTest one workflow
Once the requirements above are met, compare a small trial with how your team works today.
MONTH TWOReview actual use
Track adoption, output quality, business results, and actual costs against the estimate.
MONTH THREEDecide what comes next
Use the results to decide whether to stop, adjust, or expand the pilot.
Risk profile
Required controls
Security and safe use
Confirm encryption, how the vendor uses your data, customer data separation, how long data stays and how to delete it, activity records, sign-in and user setup, where data is handled, other companies that process data, past incidents, and what your team must manage.
Exit and rollback
Export executed documents, matter links, clause libraries, playbooks, redlines, obligations, approvals, citations, review history, and audit evidence from Harvey. Keep authoritative source records in Microsoft 365. Preserve privilege and document-to-metadata relationships during export; trained review behavior may not transfer, so validate active matters and obligation continuity before cutover.
Recommended next step
Do not approve a pilot yet. Verify the current product identity, package, availability, owner, pricing, and security evidence; then define one workflow, a baseline, and rollback criteria.
Other tools to review
Compare similar tools
Legal, Contract, and Compliance AI
89TriVista score
LexisNexis
Lexis+ with Protégé (formerly Lexis+ AI)
An AI legal research tool that answers legal questions with cited case law and drafts documents, from LexisNexis, now called Lexis+ with Protege.
Why it’s an alternative—
Compare with Lexis+ with Protégé (formerly Lexis+ AI)Legal, Contract, and Compliance AI
75TriVista score
Thomson Reuters
CoCounsel
An AI assistant for lawyers, tax staff, and auditors that answers questions backed by Westlaw case law and drafts memos and briefs, from Thomson Reuters.
Why it’s an alternative—
Compare with CoCounselLegal, Contract, and Compliance AI
74TriVista score
LegalOn
An AI contract review tool that redlines contracts against more than 135 lawyer-written playbooks, scaling from a solo attorney to a 40-person department.
Why it’s an alternative—
Compare with LegalOnLegal, Contract, and Compliance AI
74TriVista score
Litera AI
AI features spread across Litera's legal software for drafting documents, comparing versions, and running deal checks inside Word and Outlook.
Why it’s an alternative—
Compare with Litera AIResearch support
How to learn more about this tool
Where to check the product, price, security, and support.
Official product information
harvey.ai
Read official information →
Research observations recorded: 1. Evidence quality: Good support.
Score history
How the rating has changed
Recorded score and category rank across research updates.
-
TriVista Score 90.2/100Category rank #1
-
TriVista Score 90.2/100Category rank #1
See how this tool fits your company
Answer a few questions about your company and compare this tool with others. The research score above stays the same.
Want help moving from research to action? Explore TriVista’s AI consulting services →