Legal · head to head
Cookiebot vs Litify
Cookiebot
Legal
Automated cookie scanning and consent banner for websites, owned by Usercentrics
- From
- Free
- Rated
- -
Litify
Legal
Legal case and matter management built natively on Salesforce
- From
- On request
- Rated
- -
The short version
- Only Cookiebot has a free tier, so it costs nothing to try first.
- Each has a real cost: Cookiebot pricing is per domain and banded by subpage count, so an organisation with many brand domains or a large content site pays many multiples of the 7 euro headline, and the bands are counted from the scan rather than from what you think you publish.; Litify pricing is not published anywhere and there is no entry tier, so a firm cannot judge affordability without entering a sales process.
- They diverge on capability: Cookiebot covers Automated cookie scanning, Litify covers Native Salesforce application.
- Prices and features above were last checked on 31 August 2026.
Where they differ
Only the attributes on which Cookiebot and Litify actually diverge.
Identical on both: user rating (Not yet rated), category (Legal).
What each one covers
Drawn from each product's published feature list. An absence here means we hold no record of it - not that the product lacks it.
Only in Cookiebot
- Automated cookie scanning
- Prior blocking
- Google Consent Mode v2
- IAB TCF support
- Consent logging
- Cookie declaration
- Multi-language banners
- Geotargeting
Only in Litify
- Native Salesforce application
- Intake and referral management
- Matter management
- Reporting and dashboards
- Mass tort handling
What people use each for
The jobs each tool is most often brought in to do.
Cookiebot
- A marketing team that needs a defensible consent record for European visitors without adding privacy engineering headcountnot Litify
- A site using Google Ads and Analytics that must send Consent Mode v2 signals or lose conversion measurement in the EEAnot Litify
- An agency managing many small client sites that wants per-domain billing it can pass through at costnot Litify
- A content-heavy publisher needing IAB TCF signals passed to advertising partnersnot Litify
Litify
- High volume plaintiff firms running mass tort matters with thousands of claimantsnot Cookiebot
- Insurance defence operations needing matter management across many concurrent filesnot Cookiebot
- Corporate legal departments needing matter intake and outside counsel spend reportingnot Cookiebot
- Multi-office practices needing referral tracking and consistent intake across locationsnot Cookiebot
Where each one falls short
Documented limitations, not opinions. Every one is a constraint you would hit in normal use.
Cookiebot
- Pricing is per domain and banded by subpage count, so an organisation with many brand domains or a large content site pays many multiples of the 7 euro headline, and the bands are counted from the scan rather than from what you think you publish.
- Enterprise features such as single sign-on, banner A and B testing and a dedicated account manager sit on Usercentrics Web CMP rather than on Cookiebot, so growing out of Cookiebot means migrating to a sibling product with its own dashboard and contract.
- Prior blocking depends on Cookiebot recognising the script, and custom or first-party tags frequently need manual tagging, which means a site can believe it is blocking trackers when it is not until someone audits it.
- Scans crawl a limited number of subpages per band, so trackers that only appear on deep or gated pages can go undiscovered and unblocked between scans.
- The free tier carries Cookiebot branding and is limited to one domain and 50 subpages, which makes it a demonstration rather than a workable option for anything but a brochure site.
Litify
- Pricing is not published anywhere and there is no entry tier, so a firm cannot judge affordability without entering a sales process.
- The system being administered is Salesforce, so realising the configurability requires Salesforce administration skills most firms must hire or contract for.
- Implementation is a configuration project measured in months, so it is not a system a firm can adopt quickly during a busy period.
- That configurability means two Litify firms can run materially different systems, which makes external support and staff mobility harder.
- There is no public documentation; the support site is behind a customer login, so buyers cannot assess the product depth before committing.
Pricing, plan by plan
Cookiebot
Free- FreeFree
- 1 domain, up to 50 subpages
- Automated scanning
- Google Consent Mode
- Premium Lite$7/month
- 1 domain, up to 50 subpages
- Custom banner design and logo
- Multi-language banners
- Premium Small$15/month
- Per domain
- Up to 350 subpages per domain
- Multiple domains supported
- Premium Medium$30/month
- Per domain
- Up to 3,500 subpages per domain
Litify
On request- Litify$undefined/year
- Quoted per customer with no published rates
- Sold as a bundled subscription including the Salesforce platform entitlement
- Implementation and configuration quoted separately
Which should you pick?
Choose Cookiebot if
- You need automated cookie scanning.
- You want to start without paying.
- You also want prior blocking.
Choose Litify if
- You need native salesforce application.
- You work on Web, iOS, Android.
- You also want intake and referral management.
Questions people ask
- Is Cookiebot or Litify better?
- Neither clearly leads. Cookiebot starts at Free and Litify at On request, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
- Which is cheaper, Cookiebot or Litify?
- Cookiebot has a free tier; the other does not. Paid plans start at Free for Cookiebot and On request for Litify.
- Does Cookiebot or Litify run on more platforms?
- Cookiebot runs on Web. Litify runs on Web, iOS, Android.
- Can I use Cookiebot for free?
- Yes. Cookiebot has a free tier, so you can try it without paying. Litify starts at On request.
- What is Cookiebot best used for?
- Cookiebot is most often used for a marketing team that needs a defensible consent record for european visitors without adding privacy engineering headcount, a site using google ads and analytics that must send consent mode v2 signals or lose conversion measurement in the eea, an agency managing many small client sites that wants per-domain billing it can pass through at cost, a content-heavy publisher needing iab tcf signals passed to advertising partners. Of those, a marketing team that needs a defensible consent record for european visitors without adding privacy engineering headcount and a site using google ads and analytics that must send consent mode v2 signals or lose conversion measurement in the eea are not what Litify is typically brought in for.
- What can Cookiebot do that Litify cannot?
- Cookiebot covers Automated cookie scanning, Prior blocking, Google Consent Mode v2, IAB TCF support. Litify covers Native Salesforce application, Intake and referral management, Matter management, Reporting and dashboards.
Answered from the vendors’ own pages
Cookiebot: Who owns Cookiebot?
Usercentrics, which acquired the Danish developer Cybot in September 2021. It is sold as Cookiebot by Usercentrics alongside the separate Usercentrics Web CMP.
Litify: Do we sign a separate contract with Salesforce?
Not according to Litify's published services agreement, which defines Litify as a reseller of the Salesforce services and defines the purchase as a combined offering of the platform plus the Litify application. You buy one subscription from Litify. Confirm how the platform appears on your own order form before signing.
Cookiebot: What does a real deployment cost?
Between 7 and 90 euros per domain per month depending on subpage count. Ten domains on the medium band is 300 euros a month, not 7.
Litify: Is Litify for personal injury or corporate work?
Both, but differently. Plaintiff firms use it for high volume personal injury and mass tort, insurance defence firms for case volume, and corporate legal departments for matter intake and spend management rather than billing.
Cookiebot: Does it support Google Consent Mode v2?
Yes, and Cookiebot is in Google CMP partner programme, which matters if you run Google advertising into the EEA.
Litify: Is it suitable for a small firm?
No. It is sold to mid-market and enterprise operations and no entry tier is marketed. The implementation and administration requirements do not amortise at small headcounts.
Cookiebot: Is the free plan usable in production?
Only for a single very small site. It caps at one domain and 50 subpages and shows Cookiebot branding on the banner.
Related pages
Other head to heads
- Cookiebot vs Secure Privacy
- Cookiebot vs Didomi
- Cookiebot vs iubenda
- Cookiebot vs DISCO
- Cookiebot vs CosmoLex
- Cookiebot vs Filevine
- Cookiebot vs Docketwise
- Cookiebot vs Lawmatics
- Cookiebot vs Aderant
- Cookiebot vs Clio
- Cookiebot vs MyCase
- Cookiebot vs Ironclad
- Cookiebot vs Logikcull
- Cookiebot vs Westlaw
- Cookiebot vs CASEpeer
- Cookiebot vs Harvey
- Cookiebot vs LexisNexis
- Cookiebot vs Litera
- Cookiebot vs Relativity
- Litify vs Secure Privacy
- Litify vs Didomi
- Litify vs iubenda
- Litify vs DISCO
- Litify vs CosmoLex
- Litify vs Filevine
- Litify vs Docketwise
- Litify vs Lawmatics
- Litify vs Aderant
- Litify vs Clio
- Litify vs MyCase
- Litify vs Ironclad
- Litify vs Logikcull
- Litify vs Westlaw
- Litify vs CASEpeer
- Litify vs Harvey
- Litify vs LexisNexis
- Litify vs Litera
- Litify vs Relativity