What are the fundraising trends in the Legal Tech market?
In our Legal Tech market deck, you will find everything you need to understand the market
SUMMARY
We analyzed every publicly disclosed equity round raised by pure-play legal technology companies between January 2024 and July 2026. We only kept disclosed equity rounds of $300K or more, excluded debt, grants, acquisitions, undisclosed rounds, broad GRC or compliance platforms, legal-services-first models, and companies where legal-work software was not the core activity.
The legal technology market expanded sharply from 2024 to 2025, then stayed very large in year-to-date 2026. The dataset shows 39 disclosed deals and $1.58B in 2024, 63 deals and $3.16B in 2025, and 28 deals with $1.23B already raised through early July 2026.
Capital in the legal technology market is highly concentrated. In 2024, Clio alone represented 56.8% of all disclosed capital. In year-to-date 2026, Legora’s $550M round represented 44.6% of the total, and the top 10 deals captured 88.6% of capital.
The headline market is much larger than the normal company experience. In year-to-date 2026, the average round was $44.1M, but the median round was only $10.35M. That gap shows that a small number of late-stage platform rounds are pulling the average far above the typical financing.
Legal AI Assistants have become the center of gravity. The category represented 53.7% of 2025 capital and 82.9% of year-to-date 2026 capital, after being only 21.3% of 2024 full-year capital. The legal technology market has moved from contract-led modernization toward AI-native legal work platforms.
Contract Management Software remains investable, but it is no longer the only major story. It led the first half of 2024 with 53.9% of capital, then fell to 11.2% for full-year 2024 and 10.7% in year-to-date 2026 as larger legal AI, practice-management, litigation, and workflow platforms absorbed the scale checks.
Funding is structurally barbelled. Seed rounds made up 38.5% of 2024 deals, 42.9% of 2025 deals, and 42.9% of year-to-date 2026 deals, while late-stage rounds took most dollars. In year-to-date 2026, late-stage Series B and later rounds captured 86.4% of capital.
North America remains the deepest legal technology funding region, but Europe has become much more important at the high end. North America captured 83.9% of 2024 capital and 78.7% of 2025 capital, while Europe led year-to-date 2026 with 64.1% of capital because of Legora and other European scale rounds.
New company formation is real but undercapitalized. First financings were 38.5% of 2024 deals, 46.0% of 2025 deals, and 39.3% of year-to-date 2026 deals, but they represented only 4.1%, 6.7%, and 6.4% of capital respectively.
The practical interpretation is that the legal technology market is not simply booming across the board. It is selectively scaling: investors are still funding many new workflow and legal AI experiments, but the largest checks are going to companies that control legal work loops, legal data, contract workflows, litigation workflows, billing economics, or broad AI workspaces.
This chart, featured in our Legal Tech market deck, breaks down revenue across customer segments in the Legal Tech market
Is more or less capital going into the legal technology market?
More capital went into the legal technology market in 2025 than in 2024, while year-to-date 2026 is only slightly below the comparable 2025 window. Full-year disclosed funding rose from $1.58B in 2024 to $3.16B in 2025, then reached $1.23B through early July 2026 versus $1.29B over the comparable 2025 period.
The direct answer is that legal technology funding remains elevated, but it is not rising in a straight line. The 2025 market nearly doubled the 2024 total, but 2026 so far is running just below the prior year’s early pace.
The more useful comparison strips out the mega-rounds. In 2024, capital excluding the largest deal was $683.6M; in 2025, it was $2.66B; and in year-to-date 2026, it was $684.1M. That means the broader capital pool improved dramatically in 2025, then normalized in 2026 around a smaller number of large platform financings.
The year-to-date comparison is especially revealing. In the first half of 2025, the legal technology market had $1.29B across 26 deals. In the first half of 2026, it had $1.23B across 28 deals. That is slightly less capital, but slightly more deal activity.
The honest interpretation is that investor appetite has stayed strong, but the market is becoming more selective. Legal technology is still attracting very large checks, but those checks are concentrated around companies with clear scale, enterprise distribution, legal data advantages, or workflow ownership.
Is legal technology funding driven by more deals or larger rounds?
Legal technology funding is being driven by both more deals and large rounds, but the answer changes by year. The jump from 2024 to 2025 was driven by both a higher deal count, from 39 to 63, and more large rounds, with 16 deals above $50M in 2025 versus 3 in 2024.
In year-to-date 2026, the story is different. Deal count is slightly ahead of the comparable 2025 period, with 28 deals versus 26, but the median round is lower, at $10.35M versus $17.0M. That means the legal technology market is showing more company activity but a smaller typical round.
The round-size distribution confirms the split. Year-to-date 2026 had 6 deals of $50M or more, including Legora, Harvey, Wordsmith, Ivo, Summize, and Legora’s extension. At the same time, 18 of the 28 deals were below $20M, so most companies were not raising mega-rounds.
The practical takeaway is that the legal technology market is barbelled. There is a wide base of seed and early-stage workflow companies, and there is a narrow top of high-conviction platforms taking most of the capital.
For deeper benchmarks on round sizes, medians, and concentration, see the full legal technology market report.
Is legal technology capital moving toward later-stage or earlier-stage companies?
Legal technology capital is moving toward later-stage companies by dollars, while deal activity remains heavily early-stage. In year-to-date 2026, Seed rounds were 42.9% of deal count but only 5.8% of capital, while Series D+ rounds were only 10.7% of deals but 64.8% of capital.
This same pattern appeared in 2025. Seed rounds were 42.9% of full-year deal count, but only 3.3% of capital. Late-stage rounds, defined as Series B and later including Growth Equity, captured 86.3% of capital.
The real signal is that legal technology company formation remains healthy, but scale capital is reserved for winners. Investors are willing to fund new legal AI, matter workflow, billing, research, and contract software companies, but the big dollars go to companies that already have customers, usage, data, or enterprise positioning.
This is not a market where the average seed company is getting pulled up by a broad funding wave. The largest checks are going to businesses that look like future legal operating systems, AI workspaces, or deeply embedded workflow platforms.
This chart, featured in our Legal Tech market deck, compares the main business model options for Legal Tech SaaS platforms
Is the legal technology market maturing or still experimental?
The legal technology market is both maturing and still experimental, depending on where you look. The capital pool is maturing around large platforms such as Clio, Harvey, Legora, Filevine, Luminance, Ivo, and Wordsmith, while the deal-count base remains experimental, with many small seed-stage legal AI and workflow companies.
The strongest maturity signal is the rise of repeat and late-stage financing. In 2025, Series D+ and Growth Equity together represented nearly 60% of capital, and year-to-date 2026 Series D+ alone represented 64.8% of disclosed capital.
The experimental signal is just as visible. Seed remained the largest stage by deal count in both 2025 and year-to-date 2026. That means the market is still testing many new wedges, especially around AI assistants, litigation workflows, in-house legal operations, patent workflows, billing compliance, and matter intelligence.
The practical interpretation is that legal technology is no longer an early market, but legal AI inside legal technology is still sorting itself out. The mature part of the market is platform consolidation; the experimental part is the race to define which AI-native workflows become durable software categories.
Are new startups still entering the legal technology market?
Yes, new startups are still entering the legal technology market at a meaningful rate. First financings represented 38.5% of 2024 deals, 46.0% of 2025 deals, and 39.3% of year-to-date 2026 deals.
That is a strong formation signal. Even as very large rounds dominate dollar totals, founders are still launching new legal technology companies across legal AI, matter management, contract automation, billing, research, and litigation workflows.
The limitation is capital depth. First financings represented only 4.1% of 2024 capital, 6.7% of 2025 capital, and 6.4% of year-to-date 2026 capital. That means new entrants are getting funded, but they are not where the market is placing its biggest financial bets.
The legal technology market is therefore not closed to new startups. It is open at the entry point, but demanding at the scale-up point. A new company can raise a first round, but the path to a large follow-on requires proof that the product owns a real legal workflow rather than just offering a generic AI layer.
For the broader view on first financings and new-company formation, see the legal technology market deck.
Are more investors entering the legal technology market?
More investors are entering the legal technology market over the full period, although repeat specialist behavior is still concentrated. The disclosed investor count rose from 110 unique investors in 2024 to roughly 128 in 2025, with 105 already disclosed in year-to-date 2026.
That breadth matters because legal technology is no longer funded only by legaltech specialists. The investor base now includes AI investors, growth funds, corporate venture arms, legal-domain funds, sovereign or strategic capital, and major generalist venture firms.
At the same time, repeat conviction is uneven. In 2026 so far, Y Combinator appeared in 4 deals, while several names such as Andreessen Horowitz, Bessemer Venture Partners, General Catalyst, Relativity, Sequoia, SignalFire, SV Angel, and Alumni Ventures appeared twice.
The real signal is that legal technology has crossed into the mainstream AI and enterprise software investor universe. But repeated category specialization is still limited to a smaller group of investors that understand legal distribution, law-firm adoption, in-house legal buying, and domain-specific legal data.
This chart, featured in our Legal Tech market deck, illustrates yearly funding for Legal Tech startups
Are top investors getting more or less active in legal technology?
Top investors are getting more active in legal technology, especially when compared with 2024. The number of identified tier-1 investors rose from 15 in 2024 to 42 in 2025, and the year-to-date 2026 dataset already identifies 37 tier-1 investors.
The quality of names changed as much as the quantity. The 2025 and 2026 datasets include repeated participation from Sequoia, Kleiner Perkins, GV, Coatue, General Catalyst, Benchmark, Y Combinator, Andreessen Horowitz, Bessemer Venture Partners, Index Ventures, Redpoint, ICONIQ, and other top-tier venture or growth investors.
That does not mean every legal technology company can raise from top-tier capital. The strongest investor clusters appear around companies with scale narratives: Harvey, Legora, Clio, Filevine, Wordsmith, Ivo, LegalOn, Luminance, Supio, Eve, and similar platforms.
The practical takeaway is that top investors are very active, but they are not evenly active across the whole market. They are concentrating around AI-native legal workspaces, contract intelligence, legal operating systems, and high-volume litigation or practice-management platforms.
Which legal technology subcategories are gaining momentum?
Legal AI Assistants are the clearest subcategory gaining momentum in the legal technology market. The category grew from 14 deals in 2024 to 32 deals in 2025, then represented 13 of 28 deals in year-to-date 2026.
The dollar shift is even stronger. Legal AI Assistants captured 21.3% of 2024 capital, 53.7% of 2025 capital, and 82.9% of year-to-date 2026 capital. That is not just a category rotation; it is a redefinition of the venture-scale legal technology thesis.
Legal Billing Software is also newly visible in 2026. It had no retained deals in 2024 or 2025, then produced three year-to-date 2026 rounds. The amounts are smaller, but the category matters because billing compliance, timekeeping, and revenue leakage are directly connected to law-firm economics.
Contract Management Software remains a durable category even though its relative share has declined. The pattern is increasingly follow-on heavy, which suggests a maturing submarket rather than a disappearing one.
For a deeper breakdown of categories across legal AI, contracts, billing, research, and matter systems, see the market report covering legal technology subcategories.
Which legal technology subcategories are losing momentum?
eDiscovery Platforms are the clearest subcategory losing momentum under this strict public-equity screen. The category had no retained pure-play disclosed equity rounds in 2024, three small rounds in 2025, and no retained rounds in year-to-date 2026.
Legal Research Tools also look weaker in year-to-date 2026 than their AI relevance might suggest. The category had six deals in 2024, eight in 2025, but only one retained deal through early July 2026, representing just 0.18% of capital.
The issue is not that discovery or research no longer matter to legal work. The issue is that investors increasingly prefer platforms that combine research with drafting, review, collaboration, matter context, billing context, or workflow execution.
The legal technology market is moving away from narrow information retrieval as a standalone venture narrative. The stronger funding story is control over more of the legal work loop, not simply better access to legal documents or case law.
This chart, featured in our Legal Tech market deck, looks at Clio’s strategy in Legal Tech
Which regions are gaining momentum in legal technology funding?
Europe is the region gaining the most capital momentum in year-to-date 2026. Europe captured 16.0% of 2024 capital and 18.2% of 2025 capital, then jumped to 64.1% of year-to-date 2026 capital.
The main reason is Legora, which raised a $550M Series D and a $50M extension in 2026. But Europe’s momentum is not only one company. The region also contributed rounds from Summize, DeepIP, Avvoka, Newcode, Stilta, Crimson, DeepJudge, and other legal technology companies across AI, contracts, and matter workflows.
Asia-Pacific is also becoming more visible by deal count, although not yet by dollars. It represented one deal in 2024, three full-year deals in 2025, and three deals already in year-to-date 2026. The amounts remain small relative to North America and Europe, but the region is no longer absent.
The broader signal is that legal technology is becoming more geographically distributed at the company-formation level. Scale capital still clusters around a few winners, but credible startups are appearing outside the traditional North American legaltech corridor.
Which regions are losing momentum in legal technology funding?
North America is losing relative capital share in year-to-date 2026, even though it remains the largest region by deal count. North America captured 83.9% of 2024 capital and 78.7% of 2025 capital, but only 34.7% of year-to-date 2026 capital.
This is not a sign that North America is weak. North America still produced 14 of the 28 year-to-date 2026 deals, and it continues to host major platforms such as Harvey, Ivo, Sandstone, Checkbox, PointOne, Patlytics, and others.
The decline is relative, not absolute. Europe’s Legora-led surge changed the regional mix, while North America’s 2026 capital remained substantial at $428M. The right interpretation is that the legal technology market is becoming less dollar-dependent on North America in one specific window.
Latin America, the Middle East, and Africa remain thin in the disclosed dataset. Latin America appeared in 2025 through Enter, the Middle East had one small 2025 deal, and Africa had no qualifying disclosed deals across the tracked period.
Is legal technology becoming more global or regionally concentrated?
Legal technology is becoming more global by deal geography, but scale capital remains concentrated. Across 2024, 2025, and year-to-date 2026, most disclosed rounds came from North America and Europe, with Asia-Pacific becoming more visible and Latin America and the Middle East appearing only selectively.
The global expansion is clearer in deal count than in dollars. In 2025, Europe had 23 deals, North America had 35, Asia-Pacific had 3, Latin America had 1, and the Middle East had 1. In year-to-date 2026, North America had 14, Europe had 11, and Asia-Pacific had 3.
Capital concentration is still strong. North America and Europe together accounted for virtually all legal technology capital in 2024, 2025, and year-to-date 2026. Asia-Pacific is present, but it has not yet produced the kind of repeated $50M+ or $100M+ legal technology rounds that would rebalance the market.
The practical takeaway is that legal technology is globalizing at the startup level before it globalizes at the scale-capital level. Founders are appearing in more regions, but mega-rounds still depend on investor familiarity, enterprise legal budgets, law-firm distribution, and access to high-value legal data.
For deeper regional context, see the full market view on legal technology funding regions.
This chart, featured in our Legal Tech market deck, shows how AI contract automation has driven growth in the Legal Tech market over time
Is legal technology capital moving toward proven winners or new opportunities?
Legal technology capital is moving toward proven winners by dollars, while new opportunities continue to enter by deal count. In year-to-date 2026, first financings were 39.3% of deals but only 6.4% of capital.
The same structure was visible in 2024 and 2025. First financings were 38.5% of 2024 deals but only 4.1% of capital, then 46.0% of 2025 deals but only 6.7% of capital.
That means the legal technology market is not rejecting new ideas. It is simply pricing them very differently from companies that already have adoption, data, distribution, or a second-round proof point.
Companies that raised more than once across the tracked period are especially important signals. Harvey, Legora, Clio, Robin AI, Lawhive, Leya, Spellbook, Ivo, Luminance, Definely, Supio, Eve, Wordsmith, DeepJudge, Theo AI, and others show that repeat financing is one of the strongest indicators of durable investor conviction.
Is the legal technology market becoming winner-takes-most?
The legal technology market is not literally winner-takes-most, but capital is becoming winner-takes-a-lot. In 2024, the largest deal represented 56.8% of all capital. In year-to-date 2026, the largest deal represented 44.6%, and the top 10 deals represented 88.6%.
Even the more diversified 2025 market stayed concentrated. The top deal represented 15.8% of capital, the top three represented 37.9%, and the top 10 represented 70.6%. That is less extreme than 2024 or 2026, but still very unequal.
The bottom half of deals tells the same story from the other direction. The bottom 50% of deals represented only 4.9% of 2024 capital, 3.7% of 2025 capital, and 6.6% of year-to-date 2026 capital.
The practical rule is simple: do not read legal technology funding totals as proof that the average startup is flush with capital. Most dollars are flowing to a small group of companies that investors believe can become category-defining platforms.
Is the next wave of legal technology winners becoming visible?
The next wave of legal technology winners is becoming visible, but it is split between large AI platforms and smaller workflow wedges. The clearest scale candidates are companies that keep raising large follow-ons, such as Harvey, Legora, Ivo, Wordsmith, Clio, Filevine, Eve, Supio, Luminance, and Spellbook.
The smaller wedge candidates are also important. Companies such as Sandstone, Chamelio, Newcode, Stilta, Advocacy, Crimson, Parambil, Antidote, PointOne, and Jurisphere.ai show where new legal technology formation is happening in 2026.
The key test is whether these companies can move from a narrow entry point into control over a repeatable legal workflow. In legal technology, a strong AI demo is not enough. The product needs to sit inside contract review, matter intake, litigation facts, legal research, billing compliance, timekeeping, patent work, or in-house legal operations.
The honest interpretation is that the next winners will not be the companies that simply say “AI for lawyers.” They will be the ones that use AI to own a workflow with budget, data, repetition, and measurable legal or economic value.
For more detail on repeat raisers and emerging legal technology winners, see the deeper analysis of the legal technology market.
As this chart shows, and as featured in our Legal Tech market deck, search interest in Legal Tech has been growing steadily
Is the legal technology funding landscape fragmenting or consolidating?
The legal technology funding landscape is fragmenting by company formation and consolidating by capital allocation. The market had 39 deals in 2024, 63 in 2025, and 28 already in year-to-date 2026, so the number of companies and experiments has clearly expanded.
But the dollars are consolidating around fewer companies. In 2026 so far, the top three deals captured 66.5% of capital, and the top 10 captured 88.6%. In 2024, the top three captured 71.7%, while in 2025 the top 10 captured 70.6%.
The investor landscape is similarly mixed. Many investors are appearing in the category, but repeat activity is concentrated among a smaller group of legaltech-aware or AI-aware funds. Y Combinator, GV, Sequoia, Kleiner Perkins, General Catalyst, Benchmark, The LegalTech Fund, Thomson Reuters Ventures, and others show up repeatedly across the period.
The right framing is asymmetric consolidation. The company base is widening, but capital, attention, and perceived category leadership are concentrating around a few platforms with legal workflow depth.
Where is investor attention shifting in legal technology?
Investor attention in the legal technology market is shifting toward AI-native legal work platforms, not generic legal software. Legal AI Assistants captured 82.9% of year-to-date 2026 capital, compared with 53.7% in 2025 and 21.3% in 2024.
But the shift is not toward every AI product equally. Standalone Legal Research Tools were weak in year-to-date 2026, and eDiscovery had no retained disclosed pure-play equity rounds. Investors are favoring platforms that combine research, drafting, review, matter context, contract intelligence, collaboration, or workflow execution.
Billing and timekeeping are also gaining attention, but in a quieter way. Antidote, PointOne, and other billing-related rounds suggest that investors are starting to care about law-firm revenue leakage, outside counsel guideline compliance, and the financial layer of legal work.
The broader investment thesis is clear. Legal technology startups gain stronger funding credibility when they attach AI to a specific legal workflow, proprietary legal corpus, firm knowledge base, litigation process, contract lifecycle, billing rule, or operational bottleneck.
For ongoing tracking of where investor attention is moving across the legal technology market, see the legal technology market report.
INSIGHTS
The insights below come from reviewing every disclosed equity round in the legal technology market between January 2024 and July 2026, including the full 2024 and 2025 datasets and the year-to-date 2026 dataset.
- The legal technology market is not in a simple boom; it is in a selective scale-up cycle. Total capital nearly doubled from 2024 to 2025, but the comparable 2026 period is slightly below the comparable 2025 period, which means the market remains strong but more concentrated.
- Headline capital totals overstate the health of the average company. In year-to-date 2026, the average round was about $44M while the median was about $10M, so the typical financing environment is much smaller than the headline suggests.
- The market has a persistent barbell structure. Seed rounds dominate deal count, while Series D+ and other late-stage rounds dominate capital, leaving a thinner middle than a casual reading of total deal count would imply.
- First financings are a reliable sign of formation, but a weak signal of capital conviction. Across 2024, 2025, and year-to-date 2026, first financings consistently represented a large minority of deals but only a small single-digit share of capital.
- Legal AI Assistants have become the default venture-scale category in legal technology. Their year-to-date 2026 capital share of nearly 83% is too large to treat as a normal mix shift; it shows that investors increasingly define legaltech ambition through AI-native legal work platforms.
- The best-funded legal AI companies are not just chat layers. They usually connect AI to legal research, drafting, contracts, matter data, litigation workflows, billing rules, firm knowledge, or in-house legal operations.
- Contract Management Software remains durable but more mature. The category still attracts meaningful capital, but the 2026 pattern is follow-on heavy, which suggests investors are backing proven CLM and contract-intelligence vendors rather than forming many new ones.
- Legal Billing Software is a sleeper category. It is small by dollars, but its emergence in 2026 matters because it is tied to measurable law-firm economics: time capture, bill review, guideline compliance, pricing, and write-off prevention.
- eDiscovery’s weak showing is meaningful because it is one of the oldest legaltech categories. The absence of retained 2026 deals suggests that investor attention has shifted away from classic document discovery toward broader litigation intelligence and AI-enabled matter workflows.
- Legal Research Tools are investable but underweighted in 2026. The market appears to prefer research as one function inside a broader legal AI platform rather than as a standalone destination category.
- North America remains the deepest legaltech ecosystem, but Europe has shown it can produce global-scale rounds. Legora’s 2026 financings changed the regional capital picture and proved that Europe can lead the category in a given window.
- Asia-Pacific is becoming more visible in deal count, but not yet in scale capital. The region needs repeated $50M+ rounds before it materially changes the global capital balance.
- The legal technology market is globalizing at the startup level before it globalizes at the mega-round level. Founders are appearing in more regions, but the largest checks still cluster around North America and Europe.
- Repeat raisers deserve more weight than isolated funding announcements. Companies that raise multiple times across the dataset show stronger evidence of traction, insider confidence, or competitive pressure to scale quickly.
- The largest deals are changing category interpretation. A single Clio, Harvey, Legora, or Filevine round can shift capital shares, stage shares, and regional shares, so every conclusion should be read with top-deal concentration in mind.
- Investor quality has improved materially since 2024. The rise in tier-1 investor participation shows that legal technology has moved from a specialized vertical software niche into the mainstream AI and enterprise software conversation.
- Domain distribution still matters. Legal buyers, law-firm procurement, in-house workflows, trust, data security, and legal-domain accuracy remain barriers that generic AI companies cannot ignore.
- The most durable legal technology companies are likely to control a work loop, not just a feature. The strongest funding cases tie the product to repeated legal work, proprietary context, measurable output, and budget ownership.
- The best forecasting rule is to separate formation health from scale-capital health. Formation health is measured by first financings, seed deal count, and regional breadth; scale-capital health is measured by follow-on capital, late-stage share, repeat top-tier investors, and concentration in platform rounds.
This chart, featured in our Legal Tech market deck, shows how AI contract review platform technology has evolved over time
OUR METHODOLOGY TO BUILD THIS TRACKER
We built this tracker by reviewing publicly disclosed funding rounds for legal technology companies between January 2024 and July 2026. The dataset covers full-year 2024, full-year 2025, and year-to-date 2026 through early July.
We applied four core filters. First, we only included equity rounds. Second, each retained round needed a disclosed deal size of at least $300,000. Third, the company needed to be a pure-play legal technology company, meaning more than 80% of its activity had to be dedicated to software for legal work, legal decision-making, contracts, litigation, research, billing, matter management, eDiscovery, or legal AI for law firms and in-house legal teams. Fourth, each deal needed confirmation from a direct company announcement, press release, tier-1 media report, specialized legal technology source, or relevant regional publication.
We excluded grants, debt, structured financings, acquisitions, SPAC transactions, business combinations, undisclosed-size rounds, rounds below $300,000, legal-services-first companies, AI-native law-firm models, broad GRC, privacy, AML, audit, embedded finance, or compliance platforms that were not first and foremost legal-team systems.
Undisclosed-amount rounds were excluded because including them would distort dollar-based metrics such as total capital, average round size, median round size, category share, stage share, and regional share. Notable excluded cases included debt-only or non-software legal-adjacent financings and companies whose products were not clearly more than 80% dedicated to legal-work software.
All categories, stages, regions, investor names, first-financing labels, and capital totals were normalized from the disclosed public dataset. Every average, median, share, concentration ratio, and comparison in the article is computed from the retained disclosed-equity sample only, so stealth rounds and private undisclosed financings are necessarily absent.
Related blog posts
- What is new in the Legal Tech market?
- The latest news in the Legal Tech market
- What is the real size of the Legal Tech market?
- The latest funding news in the Legal Tech market
- How funding activity has evolved in the Legal Tech market
- The startups that have raised the most funding in the Legal Tech market
