What are the top Legal Tech startups by revenue today?

The ranking of top startups in the Legal Tech market by revenue

Below is a table ranking all the companies in this market by their current revenue scale. You can find our methodology at the end of this page.

If you want a deeper understanding of the market and its current dynamics, get our report covering the Legal Tech Market.

Which companies should actually count as Legal Tech startups?

For this ranking, the useful definition is an independent private technology company whose business is substantially built around legal work, law firms, legal departments, contracts, litigation, legal research or closely related workflows.

That definition immediately removes Thomson Reuters, LexisNexis and Wolters Kluwer from the startup ranking. Their legal businesses are huge, and we use them later as benchmarks, but putting a public information conglomerate next to Harvey or Legora would answer a different question.

We do include older private companies such as Clio and Icertis. Calling a company founded more than 15 years ago a startup is debatable, but excluding them would hide some of the largest independent private Legal Tech businesses in the world.

Contract-management companies require some judgment too. Icertis and Ironclad sell well beyond legal departments into procurement, sales and finance, yet contracts remain at the center of their products and legal teams are major customers. They belong in the wider Legal Tech comparison, with that broader customer perimeter kept in mind.

The same discipline applies to metrics. ARR stays ARR, annual revenue stays annual revenue, and customer counts stay customer counts. A $500M ARR disclosure and $500M of recognized revenue tell us different things, even if both help us understand how big a company has become.

Which Legal Tech startups make the most revenue today?

Clio currently has the strongest claim to the top spot, while Harvey, Icertis, Filevine and Ironclad form the next major revenue tier.

Clio directly disclosed more than $500M in ARR. Harvey is now estimated around $400M ARR by Sacra, with fresh company disclosures showing that its growth has continued at an unusual pace. Icertis said it was approaching $350M ARR. Filevine is estimated around $250M, while Ironclad directly confirmed that it had passed $200M ARR.

Then comes a fast-growing group around the $100M level. Legora has crossed $100M ARR. EvenUp is reported around $100M. Brazil's Jusbrasil has become much more important after buying MinutaIA, with Brazilian business reporting putting the combined company on a path toward roughly R$1B in recurring revenue. LegalOn has passed ¥10B ARR, which the company translated to about $67M when it announced the milestone.

The exact ordering becomes less certain as we move down because private companies disclose revenue in very different ways. Still, the broad hierarchy is much clearer now than it was even a year ago.

Approx. position	Company	Best current scale evidence	Metric	How strong is the evidence?
1	Clio	>$500M	ARR	Direct company disclosure
2	Harvey	~$400M	ARR	Current external estimate, backed by very strong company growth disclosures
3	Icertis	Approaching $350M	ARR	Direct company disclosure
4	Filevine	~$250M	ARR	External estimate
5	Ironclad	>$200M	ARR	Direct company disclosure
6	Jusbrasil + MinutaIA	Approaching R$1B	ARR / revenue target around combined business	Credible Brazilian business reporting
7	Legora	>$100M	ARR	Credible reporting
8	EvenUp	~$100M	ARR	External reporting
9	LegalOn Technologies	>¥10B, about $67M when disclosed	ARR	Direct company disclosure
10	Luminance	~$60M	ARR	External estimate; company confirms revenue doubled
11	Onit	~$54.5M	Annual revenue	Third-party estimate
12	ContractPodAi	~$47M	Annual revenue	Third-party estimate
13	Jus Mundi	~$37M	Annual revenue	Third-party estimate
14	Lexroom	>€20M	ARR	Direct company disclosure
15	Eudia	>$20M	ARR	CEO disclosure

Is Clio the biggest Legal Tech startup right now?

Yes. Clio currently has the strongest combination of scale and direct revenue evidence among independent private Legal Tech companies.

Clio announced that it had surpassed $500M in annual recurring revenue. That is a cleaner datapoint than the estimates we have for several companies immediately below it.

The business has also become much broader. Clio started around practice management for smaller firms and now sells billing, payments, workflow software and products for larger legal organizations. Its $1B acquisition of vLex added legal research, legal content and AI to that stack.

Hundreds of thousands of legal professionals now use Clio across more than 130 countries, according to the company. The customer base increasingly includes larger law firms, corporate legal teams and government organizations alongside the smaller firms that built the business.

There is one caveat worth keeping visible: $500M ARR does not mean Clio necessarily recognized $500M of accounting revenue over its previous fiscal year. For a private subscription-software company, though, ARR gives us a strong view of its current commercial run rate.

As of now, no other independent private Legal Tech company has disclosed a stronger comparable number.

Has Harvey already caught Clio?

Not yet on the evidence we can defend today, but the gap has narrowed much faster than expected.

Sacra currently estimates Harvey at around $400M ARR, compared with Clio's directly disclosed figure above $500M. Harvey therefore remains behind on both the headline number and the quality of the revenue evidence.

The growth underneath that estimate is hard to dismiss. Harvey said in August that its second quarter alone added more than $100M of ARR. The company had already reached roughly $190M ARR around the end of 2025 according to founder comments reported by TechCrunch, after crossing $100M only months earlier.

Commercial adoption has kept moving too. Harvey now says 80% of the Am Law 100 use the platform, and its latest financing valued the company at $15.5B. Earlier in the year, the company reported more than 100,000 lawyers across 1,300 organizations; subsequent product materials have put usage above 140,000 legal professionals and more than 1,500 organizations.

The $400M figure still needs the word "estimated" beside it. Harvey's own disclosures, however, make the direction pretty clear.

Clio remains larger today. Harvey has become close enough that another year of anything resembling its recent growth could change the order.

Has Harvey now passed Icertis?

Harvey probably has a larger current ARR run rate than Icertis, although Icertis still gives us the cleaner disclosed figure.

Icertis said in August 2025 that it was approaching $350M ARR. The company also said more than one third of the Fortune 100 used its contract-intelligence platform, giving that revenue figure a large enterprise base behind it.

Since then, Icertis has kept growing. Its 2026 update said it added nine new Fortune-ranked companies during 2025, more than half of existing customers expanded their relationships, monthly active users rose by more than 60%, and AI ARR increased by nearly 40%.

Harvey's current ~$400M level comes from an external estimate rather than a formal company financial disclosure. We should therefore be more confident about Icertis being near $350M than Harvey being exactly at $400M.

The timing still tilts the current-scale comparison toward Harvey. Its estimated ARR is fresher, and Harvey itself has disclosed more than $100M of ARR added during a single recent quarter.

So on current scale, Harvey appears larger. On directly verified financial evidence, Icertis has the cleaner number.

How big are Filevine and Ironclad now?

Filevine and Ironclad have both become $200M-plus Legal Tech businesses, putting them well ahead of most of the newer AI startups by absolute recurring revenue.

Filevine is estimated by Sacra at roughly $250M ARR. We do not have a direct company disclosure for that amount, so the precise figure deserves caution.

What we can verify directly is a substantial operating footprint. Filevine said late in 2025 that more than 6,000 customers and more than 100,000 legal professionals were using its platform. Those users were uploading over 20 million document pages every day.

Ironclad gives us stronger financial evidence. The company announced in February that it had surpassed $200M ARR. It later said more than 65% of customers had adopted its AI capabilities, while its Jurist AI product had grown ARR almost sixfold year over year.

These companies also show why the Legal Tech revenue story cannot be reduced to the current wave of generative-AI startups. Filevine built its position around case management and litigation workflows. Ironclad became large through contract lifecycle management. AI is now accelerating both companies rather than creating them from scratch.

On estimated scale, Filevine is probably somewhat larger. On disclosed financial evidence, Ironclad is easier to rank with confidence.

Which Legal AI startups have already crossed $100M ARR?

Harvey, Legora and EvenUp have now reached the $100M ARR level, while Jusbrasil has also moved into this scale bracket through a different path.

Harvey is already far beyond the threshold. The current external estimate sits around $400M ARR, and the company's own quarterly growth disclosures support the idea that its revenue base has expanded dramatically since crossing $100M.

Legora crossed $100M ARR during the spring, according to TechCrunch. That happened shortly after a $550M Series D and only a few years after the company was founded.

EvenUp has been reported around $100M ARR too. Its business is much narrower: the platform concentrates on personal-injury law rather than trying to become a universal legal workspace. EvenUp now says its technology is used by 30% of the top 100 personal-injury firms and handles more than 10,000 cases every week.

Jusbrasil is harder to compare directly because its latest figure is denominated in Brazilian reais and sits around an acquisition. Still, the combination with MinutaIA creates another Legal AI business operating at a clearly substantial recurring-revenue scale.

Company	Current revenue scale	Main market	What stands out
Harvey	~$400M ARR	BigLaw and enterprise legal	Largest AI-native Legal Tech revenue estimate we found
Jusbrasil + MinutaIA	Approaching R$1B	Brazilian legal research and drafting	Huge local distribution plus fast-growing AI products
Legora	>$100M ARR	Law firms and legal teams	Reached nine figures unusually quickly
EvenUp	~$100M ARR	Personal injury	Built nine-figure scale inside one practice area
LegalOn	>¥10B ARR	Contracts and in-house legal	Strongest direct Asian Legal AI revenue disclosure
Luminance	~$60M ARR estimate	Contracts and enterprise legal	Company says global revenue doubled for two consecutive years
Lexroom	>€20M ARR	European civil-law markets	Rapid expansion across local legal-data markets
Eudia	>$20M ARR	In-house legal	CEO-disclosed figure

How fast are Harvey and Legora actually growing?

Harvey and Legora are growing at a speed that would have looked extreme for Legal Tech only a few years ago.

Harvey crossed $100M ARR in 2025. Founder Winston Weinberg later said the company finished that year around $190M. During a recent quarter, Harvey says it added more than $100M of ARR in just three months. Sacra now estimates the total at roughly $400M.

That means Harvey has added more recurring revenue in a few quarters than many established Legal Tech vendors built over a decade.

Legora has compressed the same pattern into an even younger company. Reporting around its latest financing said it crossed $100M ARR shortly after raising its Series D. Earlier reported figures had placed the business far below that level, so the jump has been rapid.

Customer counts tell a similar story. Legora's newsroom now says the platform is used by more than 100,000 legal professionals across more than 1,500 law firms and in-house legal teams in over 50 markets.

There is still a large absolute gap between the two companies. Harvey has the bigger recurring-revenue base, while Legora has expanded globally at remarkable speed from a smaller starting point.

The rivalry is worth watching simply because both are still moving fast enough that today's distance may not hold for long.

Are contract-management companies still bigger than Legal AI copilots?

The biggest contract-management companies remain huge, but Harvey has already reached the same revenue neighborhood and appears to have moved ahead of them on current run rate.

Icertis was approaching $350M ARR in its last direct disclosure. Ironclad has surpassed $200M. Those businesses spent years building deep integrations with corporate systems, procurement teams and enterprise legal departments.

Harvey's estimated ~$400M ARR puts a general Legal AI platform above both on current headline scale.

The categories are also starting to overlap. Icertis now describes itself around AI-native contract intelligence and says AI ARR grew almost 40% during 2025. Ironclad is pushing agents across contracting workflows. Luminance has expanded from document analysis into a broader contract platform. Legora has integrations with Ironclad rather than forcing customers to choose one system or the other.

The old CLM-versus-copilot distinction is getting less useful.

A legal department may keep Ironclad as its contract system, use Legora or Harvey for research and drafting, and add specialized agents on top. Revenue can therefore grow across several layers of the stack at once.

Is Jusbrasil now one of the world's biggest Legal AI businesses?

Yes. Jusbrasil now belongs in the global Legal AI scale conversation, even though its exact position is harder to pin down than Clio's or LegalOn's.

Jusbrasil acquired MinutaIA, a Brazilian legal-drafting startup that had already reached roughly R$100M ARR. Brazilian business reporting around the transaction said the enlarged Jusbrasil business was aiming at roughly R$1B in revenue.

The distribution behind that ambition is unusual. Jusbrasil says more than 30 million unique users visit the platform each month and more than 80% of Brazilian lawyers are registered.

This gives the company something most young Legal AI startups are still trying to build: a huge existing audience and an enormous proprietary legal-data footprint.

MinutaIA adds a fast-growing generative-AI layer on top of that distribution. The combination makes Brazil one of the few markets where a locally built Legal AI ecosystem can reach serious scale without first relying on the U.S. BigLaw market.

We would still avoid giving Jusbrasil a precise dollar rank beside Harvey or Icertis until the combined company publishes a cleaner recurring-revenue figure.

A global Legal AI ranking that ignores Jusbrasil now misses one of the market's largest businesses.

How big is LegalOn Technologies today?

LegalOn has passed ¥10B in ARR, making it one of the largest Legal AI companies with a direct public recurring-revenue disclosure.

When LegalOn announced the milestone, it translated the figure to approximately $67M. The company said it reached that level six and a half years after launching its first product.

LegalOn also reported more than 7,000 legal teams using the platform, including more than 30% of Japanese public companies. Its international presence has expanded through offices and hiring in the U.S. and UK.

The product has widened too. LegalOn initially built its reputation around AI contract review. Today it also sells matter management, contract management, compliance tools and AI agents for legal departments.

That expansion gives LegalOn more room to grow inside existing customers as contract review gets more crowded.

LegalOn remains much smaller than Clio, Harvey or Icertis, but it is already too large to treat as an emerging company.

Is Luminance still growing quickly?

Yes. Luminance says global revenue doubled during 2025 for the second year in a row, while U.S. revenue grew 2.5 times.

That direct growth disclosure is more useful than pretending we have perfectly audited private-company revenue. Sacra estimates Luminance at roughly $60M ARR, but the company itself does not publicly confirm that exact number.

The operating evidence is strong. Luminance says it processed more than 18 million contracts during 2025 across more than 80 languages. It also signed its first eight-figure enterprise deal.

North America has become particularly important. The company says the U.S. now accounts for 44% of global revenue, despite Luminance being founded in the UK.

Luminance is easy to underestimate because it has existed since 2015, well before the current wave of generative AI, so it does not always get grouped with younger companies such as Harvey and Legora.

Its recent numbers suggest that age has not slowed it much. Luminance has turned its earlier document-analysis technology into a wider enterprise Legal AI platform while the market around it accelerated.

Is EvenUp really a $100M Legal Tech company?

The best available reporting puts EvenUp around $100M ARR, and its operating scale makes that figure plausible.

EvenUp focuses on personal-injury law, particularly the pre-litigation work surrounding medical records, demands, case progression and settlement preparation.

That narrow focus has produced a surprisingly large business. The company says its platform is currently used by 30% of the top 100 personal-injury firms and works across more than 10,000 cases every week representing over $14B in damages.

The reported $100M ARR milestone therefore sits behind real workflow volume rather than a handful of large enterprise pilots.

EvenUp is also pushing beyond document generation. Its recent products include communication agents and a "Pre-Litigation as a Service" model that mixes AI software with operational support for law firms.

A growing share of Legal Tech revenue may come from these software-plus-service models, where the vendor takes responsibility for a complete workflow rather than charging only for seats.

For now, EvenUp is the clearest example of a specialist legal workflow becoming a nine-figure software business.

Which in-house Legal AI startups are already making real revenue?

Eudia and GC AI currently give us the clearest revenue evidence among the newer AI companies built mainly for corporate legal departments.

Eudia's CEO said the company crossed $20M ARR around the end of 2025. Its model combines AI software with legal work and alternative legal services, so its economics differ from a pure seat-based SaaS company.

GC AI directly disclosed that it grew from $1M to more than $10M ARR in less than a year, averaging 23% monthly growth during 2025. More recent external estimates put the company around $20M, although we have more confidence in the company's own $10M-plus disclosure.

Other companies have strong adoption without enough public revenue information to rank cleanly. Wordsmith says it serves hundreds of companies. Ivo has reported rapid ARR growth across enterprise legal teams. LegalFly and Summize have disclosed very high growth rates without publishing an absolute recurring-revenue base.

The category is larger than a revenue-only table can show.

Company	Strongest useful public evidence	What we can say confidently
Eudia	>$20M ARR	Direct CEO disclosure
GC AI	>$10M ARR directly disclosed; higher current estimates exist	Genuine eight-figure recurring-revenue business
Wordsmith AI	500+ companies reported	Strong adoption, revenue undisclosed
Ivo	150+ enterprise legal teams	Strong enterprise traction, absolute ARR undisclosed
LegalFly	ARR growth above 800% reported	Fast growth from an unknown base
Summize	ARR up 75% YoY	Established growth, absolute ARR undisclosed
Agiloft	Large enterprise customer base	Current standalone revenue not publicly clean enough to rank

Which patent Legal AI startups are making real revenue?

Solve Intelligence has the clearest financial evidence among the newer patent-focused Legal AI startups, with the company saying it reached eight-figure ARR.

That gives us a direct lower bound above $10M without pretending we know the exact number. External estimates place Solve around $12M, which is directionally consistent with the company's disclosure.

The usage underneath it is substantial. Solve has reported large volumes of patent applications, office-action responses and claim-chart work generated through its platform.

Patlytics has impressive law-firm penetration but less public revenue evidence. The company has said its technology is used across a large share of the Am Law 100, yet customer penetration cannot be turned into revenue without making assumptions.

DeepIP is another fast mover. The company recently said ARR had grown tenfold in 18 months and that more than 400 IP law firms and corporate IP teams across 25 jurisdictions were using the platform.

Patent AI has already produced several meaningful businesses. Solve is currently the easiest one to place financially because it has given us an absolute ARR threshold. DeepIP and Patlytics may end up higher or lower once comparable revenue numbers become public.

Which Legal Tech startups are biggest outside North America?

Jusbrasil, Legora, LegalOn and Luminance show that large Legal Tech businesses now come from very different legal systems and geographies.

Brazil's Jusbrasil has the largest potential scale among them based on reporting around the MinutaIA deal. Its home-market distribution is exceptionally strong, with more than 30 million unique monthly users and over 80% of Brazilian lawyers registered.

Sweden-born Legora has gone global unusually fast and already sits above $100M ARR. Its customer footprint now reaches more than 50 markets.

Japan's LegalOn has passed ¥10B ARR and serves more than 7,000 legal teams.

The UK's Luminance says global revenue doubled again in 2025, with the U.S. now making up 44% of the total.

Italy's Lexroom is smaller but moving quickly. The company says it surpassed €20M ARR during the summer, up from a much smaller base, and now serves more than 20,000 law firms and legal professionals following its recent European expansion.

Local law is hard to globalize from one dataset. Brazilian court information, European civil law, Japanese contracting and country-specific legal sources all reward companies that build deeply into the local system.

Company	Origin	Best current scale evidence	Main market
Jusbrasil	Brazil	Combined business targeting roughly R$1B scale	Research, drafting, legal data
Legora	Sweden	>$100M ARR	General Legal AI
LegalOn	Japan	>¥10B ARR	Contract and in-house Legal AI
Luminance	UK	~$60M ARR estimate; revenue doubled in 2025	Contract and enterprise Legal AI
Jus Mundi	France	~$37M annual revenue estimate	Arbitration research
Lexroom	Italy	>€20M ARR	Civil-law Legal AI
Juro	UK	Filed annual revenue in the low-eight-figure-dollar range	Contracting
Solve Intelligence	UK	Eight-figure ARR	Patent AI

How much Legal Tech revenue is still hidden from public view?

A surprisingly large part of the Legal Tech market is still impossible to rank precisely because many major private vendors disclose customers and usage rather than revenue.

Relativity is the clearest example. It is used across almost the entire Am Law 200 and remains one of the central platforms in eDiscovery, but we do not have a fresh standalone revenue disclosure strong enough to place it beside Clio or Ironclad.

Aderant has a similarly entrenched position in law-firm finance and practice management. NetDocuments is one of the major legal document-management platforms. Mitratech says it serves thousands of legal teams, although its broader company perimeter also includes products outside pure Legal Tech.

Reveal, Elite, SurePoint and Smokeball create the same problem in different ways. We know they have meaningful customer bases; we cannot turn that knowledge into a clean current revenue number.

Newer AI companies add another layer of opacity. Spellbook, Wordsmith, Patlytics, Ivo and DeepIP all have credible adoption signals but incomplete absolute revenue disclosure.

This means a ranked table is naturally strongest near the top, where companies have announced major ARR milestones.

Further down, "revenue undisclosed" should never be read as "small." In several cases, the private company with no figure may be bigger than one with a neat $20M estimate.

Does $500M ARR mean Clio made $500M of revenue last year?

No. Clio's $500M-plus figure is annual recurring revenue, which measures the current recurring contract base rather than revenue recognized during the previous fiscal year.

This distinction becomes especially important with companies growing as quickly as Harvey or Legora.

Imagine a business that starts the year at $100M ARR and ends it at $300M. The company can exit the year with a $300M recurring-revenue run rate while recognized annual revenue remains materially below $300M because much of that customer growth arrived during the year.

ARR can also differ between businesses depending on how contracts, consumption charges and service components are treated.

That is why we keep the metric visible everywhere in the ranking. Clio's >$500M stays labeled ARR. Harvey's ~$400M stays ARR. Thomson Reuters' $2.868B Legal Professionals number is fiscal-year revenue.

The figures can still be compared as indicators of business scale, but they should not be presented as identical accounting measures.

For fast-growing private software companies, ARR is often the best current public datapoint available. We use it because it is useful, while keeping the limitation obvious.

Do Thomson Reuters and LexisNexis still dwarf Legal Tech startups?

Yes. The largest legacy legal-information businesses still generate several times more annual revenue than today's biggest independent Legal Tech companies.

Thomson Reuters reported $2.868B of 2025 revenue from Legal Professionals. Most of that business is recurring, with $2.789B coming from recurring revenue.

RELX reported £1.806B from its Legal division, which contains LexisNexis Legal & Professional. The division serves customers across almost 150 countries, and subscriptions account for 85% of its revenue.

Wolters Kluwer's Legal & Regulatory division generated €1.005B. About €804M of that was recurring revenue.

Put those numbers next to Clio's >$500M ARR and Harvey's estimated ~$400M ARR and the remaining gap is obvious.

At the same time, the private companies have reached a scale that would have been hard to imagine a few years ago. Several now generate hundreds of millions of dollars in annualized recurring revenue, and the fastest-growing AI-native companies reached those levels in only a few years.

Business	Latest useful scale figure	Metric	What it is
Thomson Reuters Legal Professionals	$2.868B	Fiscal-year revenue	Public incumbent
RELX Legal / LexisNexis	£1.806B	Fiscal-year revenue	Public incumbent
Wolters Kluwer Legal & Regulatory	€1.005B	Fiscal-year revenue	Public incumbent
Clio	>$500M	ARR	Private Legal Tech
Harvey	~$400M	ARR estimate	AI-native private company
Icertis	Approaching $350M	ARR	Private contract technology
Filevine	~$250M	ARR estimate	Private Legal Tech
Ironclad	>$200M	ARR	Private contract technology

So which Legal Tech startups are the biggest by revenue today?

Clio is currently the strongest number-one answer, followed by Harvey and Icertis, with Filevine and Ironclad forming the rest of the clear $200M-plus private-company group.

Clio leads because it has surpassed $500M ARR and the figure comes directly from the company.

Harvey is the most serious challenger. The best current estimate is around $400M ARR, and its direct disclosures show that more than $100M of ARR was added during a single recent quarter. We should keep the estimate label attached, but Harvey's acceleration is no longer speculative.

Icertis sits around the mid-$300M level based on a cleaner company disclosure. Filevine appears to be around $250M ARR, although that figure is estimated. Ironclad has directly passed $200M.

The next tier is changing quickly. Legora has crossed $100M, EvenUp is reported around $100M, LegalOn has passed ¥10B, Jusbrasil has gained much more scale through MinutaIA, and Luminance continues to double revenue.

What stands out now is the depth of the market. Legal Tech has several independent private businesses with hundreds of millions of dollars in recurring revenue, plus a growing group of AI-native companies already in nine figures.

The older software categories are growing alongside the new ones. Practice management, litigation software, contract management and legal research all remain large businesses while AI becomes another major revenue layer across them.

For now, Clio leads. Harvey is closing fastest. The rest of the market is no longer small enough to treat Legal Tech as a niche software category.