Softwr

Legal · head to head

Intapp vs Litify

Intapp logo

Intapp

Legal

Risk, compliance and business intake software for professional services firms

From
On request
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite
Litify logo

Litify

Legal

Legal case and matter management built natively on Salesforce

From
On request
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite

The short version

  • Each has a real cost: 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.; 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: Intapp covers Conflicts and business intake, Litify covers Native Salesforce application.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 31 August 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which Intapp and Litify actually diverge.

Attributes where Intapp and Litify differ
AttributeIntappLitify
PlatformsWeb, Windows, iOS, AndroidWeb, iOS, Android

Identical on both: starting price (On request), pricing model (quote), free tier (No), 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 Intapp

  • Conflicts and business intake
  • Confidentiality walls
  • Time capture
  • DealCloud
  • Outside counsel guidelines compliance

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.

Intapp

  • Large firms formalising conflicts clearance and matter opening approvalsnot Litify
  • Practices that must demonstrate confidentiality walls rather than assert them as policynot Litify
  • Firms losing revenue to outside counsel guideline breaches caught only after invoicingnot Litify
  • Advisory and capital markets teams needing deal pipeline and relationship managementnot Litify

Litify

  • High volume plaintiff firms running mass tort matters with thousands of claimantsnot Intapp
  • Insurance defence operations needing matter management across many concurrent filesnot Intapp
  • Corporate legal departments needing matter intake and outside counsel spend reportingnot Intapp
  • Multi-office practices needing referral tracking and consistent intake across locationsnot Intapp

Where each one falls short

Documented limitations, not opinions. Every one is a constraint you would hit in normal use.

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.

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

Intapp

On request
  • Intapp$undefined/year
    • Modular licensing quoted per firm
    • Risk, intake, time and DealCloud modules priced separately
    • Implementation and configuration quoted separately

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 Intapp if

  • You need conflicts and business intake.
  • You work on Web, Windows, iOS, Android.
  • You also want confidentiality walls.
Intapp review

Choose Litify if

  • You need native salesforce application.
  • You work on Web, iOS, Android.
  • You also want intake and referral management.
Litify review

Questions people ask

Is Intapp or Litify better?
Neither clearly leads. Intapp starts at On request and Litify at On request, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, Intapp or Litify?
Intapp starts at On request and Litify at On request.
Does Intapp or Litify run on more platforms?
Intapp runs on Web, Windows, iOS, Android. Litify runs on Web, iOS, Android.
What is Intapp best used for?
Intapp is most often used for large firms formalising conflicts clearance and matter opening approvals, practices that must demonstrate confidentiality walls rather than assert them as policy, firms losing revenue to outside counsel guideline breaches caught only after invoicing, advisory and capital markets teams needing deal pipeline and relationship management. Of those, large firms formalising conflicts clearance and matter opening approvals and practices that must demonstrate confidentiality walls rather than assert them as policy are not what Litify is typically brought in for.
What can Intapp do that Litify cannot?
Intapp covers Conflicts and business intake, Confidentiality walls, Time capture, DealCloud. Litify covers Native Salesforce application, Intake and referral management, Matter management, Reporting and dashboards.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Share

Related pages

More on Intapp

More on Litify

Keep looking

Other head to heads