Softwr

Legal · head to head

Litify vs Luminance

Litify logo

Litify

Legal

Legal case and matter management built natively on Salesforce

From
On request
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite
Luminance logo

Luminance

Legal

Machine learning contract analysis for review, negotiation and compliance

From
On request
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite

The short version

  • Each has a real cost: Litify pricing is not published anywhere and there is no entry tier, so a firm cannot judge affordability without entering a sales process.; Luminance no independent evaluation of its accuracy has been published, and it did not take part in the Vals Legal AI Report, so buyers have only vendor-produced evidence to work from.
  • They diverge on capability: Litify covers Native Salesforce application, Luminance covers Anomaly detection.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 31 August 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which Litify and Luminance actually diverge.

Attributes where Litify and Luminance differ
AttributeLitifyLuminance
PlatformsWeb, iOS, AndroidWeb, Windows

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 Litify

  • Native Salesforce application
  • Intake and referral management
  • Matter management
  • Reporting and dashboards
  • Mass tort handling

Only in Luminance

  • Anomaly detection
  • Contract negotiation
  • Due diligence review
  • Multi-language analysis
  • Document comparison

What people use each for

The jobs each tool is most often brought in to do.

Litify

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

Luminance

  • In-house teams auditing a contract estate for a specific exposure such as change of controlnot Litify
  • Procurement and compliance functions reviewing supplier agreements at scalenot Litify
  • Transaction teams reviewing large contract populations against a deal deadlinenot Litify
  • Negotiation teams applying a standard playbook consistently across many counterpartiesnot Litify

Where each one falls short

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

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.

Luminance

  • No independent evaluation of its accuracy has been published, and it did not take part in the Vals Legal AI Report, so buyers have only vendor-produced evidence to work from.
  • The one named accuracy benchmark, ContractIQ Bench, was built, run and scored by Luminance on a dataset it has not released, against comparison models it does not name.
  • Value scales with document volume, so an organisation reviewing tens rather than thousands of contracts will not recover the licence cost.
  • Output still requires qualified review, so it reduces reading time rather than removing the lawyer, and staffing plans that assume otherwise fail.
  • Pricing is not published, so cost per matter cannot be modelled until after a sales process and a proof of concept.

Pricing, plan by plan

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

Luminance

On request
  • Luminance$undefined/year
    • Enterprise licensing quoted per organisation
    • Scoped by user count and document volume
    • Proof of concept normally run before contracting

Which should you pick?

Choose Litify if

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

Choose Luminance if

  • You need anomaly detection.
  • You work on Web, Windows.
  • You also want contract negotiation.
Luminance review

Questions people ask

Is Litify or Luminance better?
Neither clearly leads. Litify starts at On request and Luminance at On request, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, Litify or Luminance?
Litify starts at On request and Luminance at On request.
Does Litify or Luminance run on more platforms?
Litify runs on Web, iOS, Android. Luminance runs on Web, Windows.
What is Litify best used for?
Litify is most often used for high volume plaintiff firms running mass tort matters with thousands of claimants, insurance defence operations needing matter management across many concurrent files, corporate legal departments needing matter intake and outside counsel spend reporting, multi-office practices needing referral tracking and consistent intake across locations. Of those, high volume plaintiff firms running mass tort matters with thousands of claimants and insurance defence operations needing matter management across many concurrent files are not what Luminance is typically brought in for.
What can Litify do that Luminance cannot?
Litify covers Native Salesforce application, Intake and referral management, Matter management, Reporting and dashboards. Luminance covers Anomaly detection, Contract negotiation, Due diligence review, Multi-language analysis.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

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.

Luminance: Is Luminance's accuracy independently verified?

No independent verification has been published. It did not participate in the Vals Legal AI Report, the main lawyer-baselined benchmark, and the only named benchmark in its materials is one it built and ran itself. Treat the published figures as vendor claims and run a proof of concept on your own documents.

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.

Luminance: What do the ninety per cent time-saving claims mean?

They are unattributed marketing figures about time and cost rather than accuracy, published without methodology, dataset or baseline. They are not a measure of how often the software is right.

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.

Luminance: Who backs Luminance?

It launched in 2016 with backing from Invoke Capital, the fund founded by Mike Lynch, and has since raised further rounds led by March Capital and Point72 Private Investments.

Share

Related pages

More on Litify

More on Luminance

Keep looking

Other head to heads