Legal · head to head
Cookiebot vs Intapp
Cookiebot
Legal
Automated cookie scanning and consent banner for websites, owned by Usercentrics
- From
- Free
- Rated
- -
Intapp
Legal
Risk, compliance and business intake software for professional services firms
- 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.; Intapp the product set is modular, so the cost of a working risk and intake configuration is well above the entry module a firm first prices.
- They diverge on capability: Cookiebot covers Automated cookie scanning, Intapp covers Conflicts and business intake.
- Prices and features above were last checked on 31 August 2026.
Where they differ
Only the attributes on which Cookiebot and Intapp 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 Intapp
- Conflicts and business intake
- Confidentiality walls
- Time capture
- DealCloud
- Outside counsel guidelines compliance
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 Intapp
- A site using Google Ads and Analytics that must send Consent Mode v2 signals or lose conversion measurement in the EEAnot Intapp
- An agency managing many small client sites that wants per-domain billing it can pass through at costnot Intapp
- A content-heavy publisher needing IAB TCF signals passed to advertising partnersnot Intapp
Intapp
- Large firms formalising conflicts clearance and matter opening approvalsnot Cookiebot
- Practices that must demonstrate confidentiality walls rather than assert them as policynot Cookiebot
- Firms losing revenue to outside counsel guideline breaches caught only after invoicingnot Cookiebot
- Advisory and capital markets teams needing deal pipeline and relationship managementnot 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.
Intapp
- The product set is modular, so the cost of a working risk and intake configuration is well above the entry module a firm first prices.
- It assumes a firm large enough to have dedicated risk and compliance staff, and smaller practices have nobody to own the workflows it introduces.
- It sits alongside document management and billing rather than replacing them, adding integration work to an already complex estate.
- Pricing is not published, and the modular structure makes peer comparison harder because two firms rarely buy the same combination.
- Deployments change firm-wide processes such as matter opening, so rollout depends on partner behaviour change and commonly slips.
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$30/month
- Per domain
- Up to 3,500 subpages per domain
Intapp
On request- Intapp$undefined/year
- Modular licensing quoted per firm
- Risk, intake, time and DealCloud modules priced separately
- 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 Intapp if
- You need conflicts and business intake.
- You work on Web, Windows, iOS, Android.
- You also want confidentiality walls.
Questions people ask
- Is Cookiebot or Intapp better?
- Neither clearly leads. Cookiebot starts at Free and Intapp at On request, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
- Which is cheaper, Cookiebot or Intapp?
- Cookiebot has a free tier; the other does not. Paid plans start at Free for Cookiebot and On request for Intapp.
- Does Cookiebot or Intapp run on more platforms?
- Cookiebot runs on Web. Intapp runs on Web, Windows, iOS, Android.
- Can I use Cookiebot for free?
- Yes. Cookiebot has a free tier, so you can try it without paying. Intapp 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 Intapp is typically brought in for.
- What can Cookiebot do that Intapp cannot?
- Cookiebot covers Automated cookie scanning, Prior blocking, Google Consent Mode v2, IAB TCF support. Intapp covers Conflicts and business intake, Confidentiality walls, Time capture, DealCloud.
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.
Intapp: Is Intapp a practice management system?
No. It covers risk, compliance, intake and time capture. Firms run it alongside a billing and matter financial system such as Aderant or Elite 3E.
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.
Intapp: Can we check Intapp's financial position before committing?
Yes, which is unusual in this market. Intapp has been listed on Nasdaq since 2021, so revenue and retention figures appear in public filings rather than only in sales material.
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.
Intapp: What size of firm is it for?
Large firms and advisory businesses with a formal risk function. Small practices handle conflicts inside their practice management system instead.
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 NetDocuments
- Cookiebot vs Smokeball
- Cookiebot vs Luminance
- Cookiebot vs iManage
- Cookiebot vs LexisNexis
- Cookiebot vs Actionstep
- Intapp vs Secure Privacy
- Intapp vs Didomi
- Intapp vs iubenda
- Intapp vs DISCO
- Intapp vs CosmoLex
- Intapp vs Filevine
- Intapp vs Docketwise
- Intapp vs Lawmatics
- Intapp vs Aderant
- Intapp vs Clio
- Intapp vs MyCase
- Intapp vs Ironclad
- Intapp vs Logikcull
- Intapp vs Westlaw
- Intapp vs CASEpeer
- Intapp vs Harvey
- Intapp vs NetDocuments
- Intapp vs Smokeball
- Intapp vs Luminance
- Intapp vs iManage
- Intapp vs LexisNexis
- Intapp vs Actionstep