A practical comparison of CLM tools, written by someone who has seen what works and what doesn't across hundreds of legal teams.
I've spent the last fifteen years helping in-house legal teams do more with less. One question keeps coming up: which contract management software should we use?
The frustration is real. You look at comparison articles online, and they talk about systems built for Fortune 500 procurement departments. They mention features that mean nothing to you. They praise tools that make your workflows harder, not easier,and they never seem to address what you really need: a way to manage your contracts without losing your mind.
That's why I decided to write this guide. I'm going to skip the fluff, skip the marketing speak, and talk honestly about what each tool does and doesn't do. I'll help you figure out which system might be right for your team, whatever your size.
Why Most CLM Comparisons Miss the Point
Here's what I notice about most contract management software reviews: they're written from the perspective of large enterprise procurement teams or massive corporate legal departments. The software being reviewed was originally built for those kinds of organizations. Everything from the interface design to the feature set reflects that legacy.
Most contract management software was originally built for big procurement teams or massive enterprise-scale legal departments. Smaller in-house legal teams are an afterthought for these systems that got bolted on later, if they have been adjusted to scale down at all.
What does this mean for you? It means the software forces you into workflows that don't match how your team works. The interface is cluttered with features you'll never use. Implementation takes six months instead of weeks. Training is a nightmare because the system assumes you have a dedicated legal operations person, which you probably don't.
In-house legal teams have completely different needs. You're managing a smaller volume of contracts, often across different types (employment agreements, vendor agreements, customer contracts, partnership deals). You need to search through your repository quickly and intuitively. You need approval workflows that make sense for your internal team structure, not a massive organizational hierarchy. You need to know when contracts are coming up for renewal without having to set up elaborate tracking spreadsheets. You need reporting that shows you what's happening in your legal business, not procurement metrics that don't matter to you.
The CLM tools I'm going to walk through today each take different approaches to solving these problems. Some still have that enterprise heritage. Others were built from the ground up with in-house legal teams in mind. Let's talk about what that means in practice.
What In-House Legal Teams Need from Contract Management Software
Before I get into specific tools, I want to talk about what matters. When you're evaluating a CLM system, ask yourself if it handles these five things well. If it doesn't, no matter how slick the marketing is, it's probably not right for you.
First: a searchable repository. You need to find contracts fast. That means the search function needs to work intuitively. You should be able to search by contract type, by counterparty, by date, by status, by keywords within the document. You should be able to save search filters so you can run them again without typing the same criteria twice. The repository should feel like you're using Google, not wrestling with a database interface.
Second: intake and routing. Contracts come at you from everywhere. Email attachments. Shared drives. Slack messages. Meetings that end with someone saying, "Can you review this agreement?" Your CLM system needs to make it easy to get contracts into the system without creating extra work. Better CLM tools integrate with your email, your document storage, your communication platforms. They route incoming contracts to the right person automatically based on rules you set. They don't require you to manually upload everything and assign it by hand.
Third: approval workflows. You need to track who's reviewing what and where it's stuck. A good CLM system lets you set up approval workflows that mirror how your team works. Maybe some contracts need input from business development before legal review. Maybe others need finance approval before they're finalized. Maybe some need executive sign-off. Your workflow tool should be flexible enough to handle these variations without becoming a mess. It should notify people when it's their turn to review. It should let anyone see where a contract is in the process.
Fourth: renewal and obligation tracking. This is where a lot of in-house teams struggle. You have contracts that renew. You have obligations you need to meet. You have notice periods and renewal windows. The best CLM systems keep track of all of this automatically. They alert you when a renewal is coming up. They show you key dates and milestones right from the dashboard. They save you from the experience of discovering a year into a contract that you missed a renewal deadline.
Fifth: reporting that matters. You need to understand what's in your contract portfolio. How much are you spending with each vendor? Which contracts are expiring soon? How long does it take on average for your team to approve a contract? What percentage of your contracts include certain risk provisions? A good CLM tool gives you dashboards and reports that answer these questions. It doesn't just track data for tracking's sake. It gives you insights you can act on.
The Best CLM Tools for In-House Legal Teams: A Comparison
Xakia: Built for In-House Legal Teams of Any Size
I'll be honest about my bias here. I'm Jodie Baker, the CEO of Xakia, so I have skin in this game. I'm not going to tell you Xakia is perfect for everyone, but I am going to tell you why we built what we built and who it's best for.
When we founded Xakia, we did something deliberate. We didn't start by scaling down an enterprise system. We started from scratch with in-house legal teams. We asked hundreds of teams what they needed. We listened to what frustrated them. We built a system that works the way teams work, not the way software vendors wish they worked.
That philosophy shows up in every part of Xakia. Our document management system is native to the platform, which means you're not gluing together five different tools. You can store contracts, manage versions, and search across everything in one place. If you're already using NetDocuments, iManage, or SharePoint, we integrate with those connectedly, so you don't have to migrate everything you already have. We understand that not every team is ready to rip out their existing infrastructure. You can file emails directly to matters from Outlook or Gmail. You can create Word documents right within a matter without jumping back and forth between applications. You get document automation with templates, so you're not rebuilding the same contract language over and over. You can handle e-signatures from the matter dashboard instead of dealing with a separate tool. We take confidentiality seriously, which matters in legal work. You control who sees what at a granular level.
Xakia works well for teams of any size. You might have one lawyer, or ten. You might be managing a few hundred contracts, or a few thousand. The system scales with you without making you feel like you're using something designed for a different size organization. Implementation takes days, not months. Your team is usually up and running within a week or two, doing real work on real contracts. Training doesn't require a certification program. People pick it up intuitively because it's designed the way they think, not the way a database schema dictates.
Ironclad: Strong Functionality with Enterprise DNA
Ironclad is a serious platform. It has deep functionality and it's popular with larger in-house teams, especially at growth-stage companies and mid-market organizations. The platform can handle complex workflows, heavy data integration, and large contract portfolios.
The problem is that Ironclad still feels like it was built with enterprise DNA, even if the marketing is aimed at smaller teams now. The interface is dense. There's a learning curve, and it's not insignificant. Implementation takes weeks, sometimes months if you're trying to integrate heavily with other systems. You often need a legal operations specialist to get the most out of it. If you're a smaller team without that person, you'll feel like you're not gaining the platform's full potential.
Ironclad is best for teams that have the bandwidth to learn a complex system and can justify the investment in more advanced features. If you have a dedicated legal operations person and you're managing thousands of contracts with multiple business units, Ironclad can give you a lot of sophisticated functionality. If you're a lean team trying to get a system in place quickly without a long learning curve, it might feel like overkill.
Juro: Modern Interface, Contract Execution Focus
Juro has a modern, clean interface and it's built with a strong focus on contract execution and negotiation. The system guides you through the signing process. It tracks e-signatures natively. It handles counterparty negotiations and redlines in ways that some other platforms don't.
Here's the thing about Juro: it's really good at the execution piece. The weakness is on the back end. Once a contract is signed, the contract management and tracking features feel less mature than what you get from other platforms. If you're focused on managing the execution of new contracts and less focused on tracking an existing portfolio of agreements, Juro could work for you. If you need strong ongoing contract management alongside execution features, you might find yourself frustrated.
Juro is best for teams where contract execution and negotiation is your main pain point. If you're signing twenty contracts a month and you need a smooth e-signature and negotiation experience, Juro delivers that. If you're trying to solve your entire contract lifecycle from intake through renewal, look elsewhere.
Agiloft: Highly Customizable, Requires Implementation Partner
Agiloft is powerful and incredibly customizable. If your legal team has very specific workflows or requirements that don't match any out-of-the-box solution, Agiloft can probably be configured to do what you need. The platform flexibility is genuinely impressive.
The tradeoff is implementation. Agiloft is complex to implement. You almost always need a partner to help you set it up. The initial timeline is months, not weeks. The cost includes both the software license and the implementation services, which adds up quickly. Once it's live, maintaining and updating your configurations requires some technical knowledge or ongoing support.
Agiloft makes sense if you have very complex requirements that justify the implementation investment and ongoing support costs. If you want to get a CLM system up and running quickly with minimal customization, it's not the right choice. The payoff comes if you truly need the flexibility it offers.
DocuSign CLM: Part of a Larger Ecosystem
DocuSign is the e-signature leader, and DocuSign CLM is their contract management offering. If you're already deep in the DocuSign ecosystem for e-signatures and document management, adding CLM as part of that platform makes sense from an integration standpoint. The tools talk to each other naturally.
The issue is that DocuSign CLM feels like an addition to their e-signature platform rather than a core, integrated product. It's competent at contract management, but it doesn't feel like the primary focus of development. The user experience is decent but not exceptional. If your team is already using DocuSign heavily and you want to consolidate vendors, it's worth considering. If you're starting fresh and looking for the best pure contract management experience, you probably have better options.
DocuSign CLM is best as part of a broader DocuSign deployment. If you're signing contracts through DocuSign and you want your CLM system to be in the same platform family, it makes the workflow simpler. As a standalone choice, it's serviceable but not the strongest option in the market.
LinkSquares: AI-Powered Analysis, Higher Learning Curve
LinkSquares has gotten a lot of attention for its AI capabilities. The system can scan contracts and extract key data automatically. It analyzes contracts for risk. It identifies key dates and obligations without you having to manually tag everything. If you have a large existing contract portfolio that you need to organize and understand quickly, LinkSquares' AI is genuinely useful.
The downside is that LinkSquares adds complexity. The AI features are powerful, but they require some learning. The system requires more hands-on configuration than simpler platforms. Implementation is longer. If you're looking for something your team can pick up in an afternoon and start using immediately, LinkSquares isn't it. The payoff comes if you're willing to invest time in learning how to use the AI features effectively.
LinkSquares is best for teams with a large existing portfolio of contracts that needs analysis and organization, and teams that have the bandwidth to learn a more complex system. If you're starting fresh and building processes from the ground up, the AI features are nice but might not be worth the added complexity.
How to Evaluate and Choose What's Right for Your Team
You know what the tools do now. So how do you choose? Here are the questions I'd ask myself if I were in your position.
First, how big is your team and how much time do you have to implement a new system? If you're one person wearing all the hats, or a small team with no dedicated legal operations person, you need something that's intuitive and can be up and running quickly. If you have more resources and time, you can consider more complex systems that have steeper learning curves but more functionality.
Second, what's your biggest pain point right now? Are you struggling to find contracts in your repository? Then search functionality is your priority. Are you drowning in email attachments and shared drives filled with contracts? Then intake and integration features matter most. Are you forgetting renewals and missing key dates? Then renewal tracking is critical. Identify where it hurts most, and make sure the tool you're considering solves that problem well.
Third, what systems are you already using? Are you invested in Microsoft? Google? NetDocuments or iManage? SharePoint? The best CLM tool for you might not be the best one in absolute terms, but the best one that integrates with what you already have. Forcing your team to use disconnected systems creates friction and reduces adoption.
Fourth, what's your budget for implementation? Some systems require significant implementation spending. Others you can be live in a week. Be realistic about what your organization can absorb. A cheaper software license paired with a six-month implementation timeline might be more expensive than a pricier tool that's up and running in two weeks.
Fifth, talk to current users. Ask for references. Ask specific questions about the implementation process, the learning curve, the support quality, and whether the tool delivers what the vendor promised. Most vendors will happily connect you with successful customers.
The Bottom Line
Contract management doesn't need to be complicated. You need a system that helps you organize your contracts, track what matters, route approvals smoothly, and know when something's about to expire. You don't need all the enterprise features built for massive procurement teams.
The good news is that you have options now. The CLM market has matured. You can find something that fits your team's size, your workflows, and your budget.
If you're a typical in-house legal team, Xakia is designed to solve your actual problems. We've built it based on what hundreds of teams told us they needed. We've made it fast to implement and intuitive to use. We've included the features that matter for in-house legal work and left out the stuff that doesn't. We've also made sure it's secure, with ISO 27001, SOC 2 Type II, and HIPAA certification. And we've kept the pricing straightforward so you know what you're paying for.
If you want to see how Xakia compares to what you're using now, book a free demo. Walk through your actual workflows with someone on our team. See how quickly you could have this working for your team. That's the best way to know if it's the right fit.
Book a free demo at xakiatech.com/book-a-demo
