ClauseAudit vs. the alternatives
Use a lawyer when the decisive facts sit outside the document, such as a property purchase or a live dispute. Use ClauseAudit when you need to know what a contract says and which clauses are unusual, which is most employment offers, freelance contracts, NDAs, SaaS terms and residential leases. A free chatbot may not name the statute it is relying on, and any source it does give needs checking.
ClauseAudit is built for the people in between, freelancers, renters, employees and small businesses who need to know what they are signing, not a law firm on retainer.
From $19
per review
A lawyer runs $300–500/hour
~60 sec
to a full report
A lawyer takes days to weeks
50 + DC
US states, cited
Chatbots may not cite a statute
| ClauseAudit | Free AI chatbot | Hiring a lawyer | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Speed | About a minute; long documents a few minutes | Seconds | Days to weeks |
| Typical cost | From $19 a review | Free | $300–$1,000+ per contract |
| Tuned to your state’s law | Yes, 50 states + DC, with live citations | Inconsistent; may not cite a statute | Yes |
| Plain-English explanations | Yes, for non-lawyers | Depends on your prompt | Varies |
| Structured report + redline | Yes, score, clauses, DOCX redline | Freeform text | Usually a memo |
| Handles long contracts | Yes, up to 1,200 pages, billed per 35-page block | Hits length limits | Yes |
| Two-jurisdiction conflicts | Yes, flags valid-in-one-state-not-the-other | Rarely | Yes |
| Privacy | Never used for training | May be used for training | Confidential |
| Accountability | Saved report + source links | No structured saved report | Professional liability |
| Legal advice | No, risk education | No | Yes |
ClauseAudit is an automated risk-education tool, not a law firm, and is not a substitute for an attorney. For complex or high-stakes matters, consult a lawyer.
ClauseAudit vs other contract review tools
Side-by-side comparisons, including when the other tool is the better choice.
Same clause. Very different answer.
We pasted one real NDA clause into a free chatbot and into ClauseAudit. This is the difference between a reassuring guess and a grounded warning.
The clause
“Recipient may use any Confidential Information retained in the unaided memory of its personnel.”
“This is a fairly standard residuals clause. It lets the receiving party use information they happen to remember. Many NDAs include similar language, so overall this agreement looks reasonable.”
Reassuring, vague, cites nothing, and quietly wrong about the risk.
“This residuals clause lets the other side legally use your confidential information as long as it's ‘remembered’ rather than written down, gutting the protection the NDA is supposed to give you. US courts often enforce these.”
Fix: strike the residuals clause, or narrow it to exclude trade secrets and anything fixed in a document.
Grounded in the federal DTSA trade-secret baseline · plain English · with a negotiation fix.
Which one fits your situation
ClauseAudit
- Best for
- Knowing what a contract says and which clauses are unusual, before you sign
- Typical cases
- Employment offers, freelance contracts, NDAs, SaaS terms, residential leases
- Not for
- Anything already in dispute, or where the answer depends on records outside the document
Hiring a lawyer
- Best for
- Advice on your specific facts, and anything you cannot afford to get wrong
- Typical cases
- Property purchases, live disputes, heavily negotiated commercial deals, equity
- Not for
- A quick sanity check on a standard agreement, where the fee can exceed the stake
Free AI chatbot
- Best for
- Understanding what a legal term means in general
- Typical cases
- What does indemnify mean, what is a liability cap
- Not for
- Anything where the answer depends on your jurisdiction, because it may not cite the statute it relies on, and any source it gives needs checking
Common questions
Is ClauseAudit a replacement for a lawyer?
No. It tells you what a contract says and which clauses are worth asking about, with the provision each finding rests on. Deciding what that means for your circumstances is a lawyer’s judgement on facts a document review cannot see.
Why not just paste the contract into a free chatbot?
A general chatbot often does not name the statute behind an answer, and any source it gives needs checking, so it is hard to tell a correct answer from a confident one. ClauseAudit may cite only from a fixed list of verified provisions and is barred from inventing a citation; where no provision applies, it flags the risk without attaching one.
How does ClauseAudit reduce what I spend on legal fees?
Not by replacing the lawyer, by changing what you pay them for. The first pass over a contract is reading and hunting, and you are billed for it either way. Arriving with the clauses located and the provisions named moves that time from discovery to judgement.
The strongest first read, minus the bill
Get a lawyer-grade risk breakdown in seconds, and a clear report to bring to one if you need to.
View plans & get started