Contract lifecycle management and e-signature
Asked as “contract lifecycle management platform”, and as “e-signature and contract management tool”, on behalf of a mid-market B2B software company. 52 first choices recorded across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, six models each.
Standing · first-choice share
23%
Contested · Concord 19%
23PandaDoc19Concord17Juro40others
23% of first choices, contested.
Since September 2026=heldSince September 2026: 25% → 25%, ±0 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.PandaDoc held the lead, ±0 points on 25%, inside the 12-point floor.
The standing
Share is the count of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, over all six models, for a mid-market B2B software company. Ordered by share.
ProductFirst-choice shareNegative rateLabelsQuadrantSince September 2026
01
PandaDoc23%6%35accepted challenger=heldSince September 2026: 25% → 25%, ±0 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.25% → 25%
PandaDoc23%6%35accepted challenger=heldSince September 2026: 25% → 25%, ±0 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.25% → 25%02
Concord19%3%35accepted challenger▲+12Since September 2026: 6% → 18%, +12 points. Past the 12-point floor: movement. Read over the models both editions asked.6% → 18%
Concord19%3%35accepted challenger▲+12Since September 2026: 6% → 18%, +12 points. Past the 12-point floor: movement. Read over the models both editions asked.6% → 18%03
Juro17%3%33accepted challenger▲+2Since September 2026: 16% → 18%, +2 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.16% → 18%
Juro17%3%33accepted challenger▲+2Since September 2026: 16% → 18%, +2 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.16% → 18%04
Ironclad15%20%59accepted challenger▲+2Since September 2026: 12% → 14%, +2 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.12% → 14%
Ironclad15%20%59accepted challenger▲+2Since September 2026: 12% → 14%, +2 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.12% → 14%05
Zoho Contracts8%8%12accepted challenger▼−5Since September 2026: 12% → 7%, −5 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.12% → 7%
Zoho Contracts8%8%12accepted challenger▼−5Since September 2026: 12% → 7%, −5 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.12% → 7%06
DocuSign CLM4%32%38criticized challenger▲+3Since September 2026: 2% → 5%, +3 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.2% → 5%
DocuSign CLM4%32%38criticized challenger▲+3Since September 2026: 2% → 5%, +3 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.2% → 5%07
DocuSign2%7%15accepted challenger=heldSince September 2026: 2% → 2%, ±0 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.2% → 2%
DocuSign2%7%15accepted challenger=heldSince September 2026: 2% → 2%, ±0 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.2% → 2%08
Conga CLM2%30%33criticized challenger▲+2Since September 2026: 0% → 2%, +2 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.0% → 2%
Conga CLM2%30%33criticized challenger▲+2Since September 2026: 0% → 2%, +2 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.0% → 2%09
ContractWorks2%20%10accepted challenger▼−2Since September 2026: 4% → 2%, −2 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.4% → 2%
ContractWorks2%20%10accepted challenger▼−2Since September 2026: 4% → 2%, −2 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.4% → 2%Show the six products at 0%, ordered by negative rate
15
Icertis Contract Intelligence0%42%24criticized challenger=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.0% → 0%
Icertis Contract Intelligence0%42%24criticized challenger=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.0% → 0%13
Agiloft0%28%32criticized challenger=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.0% → 0%
Agiloft0%28%32criticized challenger=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.0% → 0%14
Sirion0%22%18accepted challenger=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.0% → 0%
Sirion0%22%18accepted challenger=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.0% → 0%12
ContractSafe0%7%14accepted challenger▼−2Since September 2026: 2% → 0%, −2 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.2% → 0%
ContractSafe0%7%14accepted challenger▼−2Since September 2026: 2% → 0%, −2 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.2% → 0%11
SpotDraft0%6%16accepted challenger▼−6Since September 2026: 6% → 0%, −6 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.6% → 0%
SpotDraft0%6%16accepted challenger▼−6Since September 2026: 6% → 0%, −6 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.6% → 0%10
LinkSquares0%0%25accepted challenger▼−4Since September 2026: 4% → 0%, −4 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.4% → 0%
LinkSquares0%0%25accepted challenger▼−4Since September 2026: 4% → 0%, −4 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.4% → 0%The floor is 12 points of share, measured: how far the models move a leader on their own when the same questions are asked twice with nothing changed. A larger change is movement; a smaller one is noise, and both are shown. How the floor is measured
Bars are the share of first choices, 0 to 100Every product with at least 10 labels here. Every product name links to its product page.
All six head-to-head pages: the top four products, each against each
Recommended versus criticized
Every product with at least 10 labels here, on both axes. The 30% line names a quadrant, not the verdict above: that one needs more than 40%.
Criticized challengerCriticized default
Negative label rate →
010203040506070809101112131415Accepted challengerEndorsed leader
0%First-choice share → · lines at 30% share and 25% negative40%
Key
01PandaDoc23%
PandaDoc23%02Concord19%
Concord19%03Juro17%
Juro17%04Ironclad15%
Ironclad15%05Zoho Contracts8%
Zoho Contracts8%06DocuSign CLM4%
DocuSign CLM4%07DocuSign2%
DocuSign2%08Conga CLM2%
Conga CLM2%09ContractWorks2%
ContractWorks2%10LinkSquares0%
LinkSquares0%11SpotDraft0%
SpotDraft0%12ContractSafe0%
ContractSafe0%13Agiloft0%
Agiloft0%14Sirion0%
Sirion0%15Icertis Contract Intelligence0%
Icertis Contract Intelligence0%What they warned about
A high negative share on a product with few labels is a warning. A low share on a product with many labels is salience, not sentiment.
DocuSign CLM32%
12 of 38 labels negative · 10 of 6 models · 1 hard negative
“A well-known name, but with notable recurring complaints... The biggest cautions are around **Conga CLM** and **DocuSign CLM**” DeepSeek V4 Flash, negative prompt
Conga CLM30%
10 of 33 labels negative · 9 of 6 models · 3 hard negative
“Customer reviews show high levels of dissatisfaction with feature usability, interface design and overall scalability” Claude Haiku 4.5, negative prompt
Ironclad20%
12 of 59 labels negative · 9 of 6 models · 2 hard negative
“Avoid vendors like Ironclad, Agiloft, Icertis, and ContractPodAI if budget predictability matters” Kimi K2, budget prompt
Icertis Contract Intelligence42%
10 of 24 labels negative · 7 of 6 models · 4 hard negative
“Implementation is lengthy and demanding... dramatically overkill for organizations under 500 employees.” Claude Haiku 4.5, negative prompt
What they cite
Citations exist only for the models that return a source list: fourteen of the six in this edition.
Sites the answers cite
77 of 84 answers in this category came back with a source list, from 14 of 6 models: citations where the model returns them, or the search results it consulted. 1066 links across 202 sites, every framing counted. Ranked by the number of answers carrying the site or page. None of the 36 answers across every segment cited this index's own page for the category.
vendor site · Conga42 answers · 44 citations · 13 models
vendor site · Bind39 answers · 91 citations · 11 models
34 answers · 36 citations · 11 models
29 answers · 57 citations · 12 models
vendor site · Oneflow29 answers · 35 citations · 12 models
29 answers · 34 citations · 11 models
26 answers · 26 citations · 10 models
vendor site · Sirion22 answers · 33 citations · 10 models
vendor site · Zylo22 answers · 22 citations · 9 models
vendor site · Concord21 answers · 25 citations · 12 models
vendor site · PandaDoc20 answers · 29 citations · 11 models
vendor site · ContractSafe19 answers · 24 citations · 9 models
Pages the answers cite
The ten pages named in the most answers, by full address. A page here is one the models returned with a recommendation, not one the index endorses.
40 answers · 12 models
30 answers · 11 models
26 answers · 11 models
25 answers · 11 models
24 answers · 10 models
23 answers · 9 models
22 answers · 9 models
17 answers · 7 models
17 answers · 8 models
16 answers · 11 models
Search against answers
Each company's standing in the answers beside its site's footprint in Google search, one row a site: the products the models named on it with their shares, and the share they add up to; monthly searches on Google, and DataForSEO's estimate of AI search demand (modeled from search signals, directional, not a count of queries to any assistant), for the most-searched of the company's and its products' names (the name is in each row's hover text); estimated monthly organic visits to the site; and its best position in Google's top ten for “best contract lifecycle management platform”, “contract lifecycle management platform”. US estimates from DataForSEO and Google's Ads Transparency Center. A small company's site, or a mid-sized company's site for its flagship, is marked company; a product on a large parent's site (Google, Microsoft) has no site figures. A column with no figures for this category is left out, and an empty cell means none were seen, not none exist. Two measurements side by side: neither is read as the cause of the other.
| Company and products | Share | Own site cited | Name searches, Google | AI search demand, est. | Organic visits | Paid search a month, est. | Google ads, last 30 days |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PandaDoc pandadoc.com | 23% | 527 | 60,500 | 510 | 425,196 | $42,516 | 119 |
| Concord concord.app | 19% | 89 | 246,000 | 58,369 | 18,445 | ||
| Juro juro.com | 17% | 62 | 2,900 | 536 | 44,442 | $168 | 120 |
| Ironclad ironcladapp.com | 15% | 133 | 49,500 | 3,365 | 128,319 | 120 | |
| Zoho parent site Zoho Contracts 8% | 8% | 26 | 390 | 8 | |||
| DocuSign docusign.com DocuSign CLM 4%, DocuSign 2% | 6% | 110 | 1,000,000 | 9,641 | 2,280,470 | $20 | 120 |
| Bind bindlegal.com Bind 2%, Bind Legal 2% | 4% | 13 | 33,100 | 99,561 | |||
| Conga CLM conga.com | 2% | 77 | 480 | 11 | 46,363 | $224 | 120 |
| Oneflow oneflow.com | 2% | 18 | 1,000 | 11 | 39,547 | 13 | |
| ContractWorks contractworks.com | 2% | 33 | 720 | 3 | 1,720 | 1 |
Google's top ten for the two searches hold 17 sites; 1 of them are among the sites the models cited here (g2.com). The first result for “best contract lifecycle management platform” is reddit.com.
How they answered
Six framings of the same buying question, each sent to every model in a fresh session with search on. One row per model, so a row shows whether it held its answer under rewording, what it named when cost was the constraint, and what it argued against. Computed from the raw judge labels.ShowHide
How they answered
Six framings of the same buying question, each sent to every model in a fresh session with search on. One row per model, so a row shows whether it held its answer under rewording, what it named when cost was the constraint, and what it argued against. Computed from the raw judge labels.
ShowHideModelDirect“What is the best contract lifecycle management platform for a mid-market B2B company?”Paraphrase“Which e-signature and contract management tool would you recommend to a mid-sized B2B company?”Comparative“What are the top contract lifecycle management platforms and how do they differ?”Budget-constrained“What is the best contract lifecycle management platform for a company with a limited budget?”Scale-constrained“We are a 500 person company evaluating a contract lifecycle management platform. What should we look at?”Negative“Which contract lifecycle management platforms should I avoid or be cautious about?”
Claude Opus 5no first choiceno first choiceno first choiceno first choiceno first choicenothing named
Claude Opus 4.8no first choiceno first choiceno first choiceno first choiceno first choicenothing named
GPT-6 Astrano first choiceno first choiceno first choiceno first choiceno first choicenothing named
GPT-5.6 Solno first choiceno first choiceno first choiceno first choiceno first choicenothing named
Gemini 3.1 Prono first choiceno first choiceno first choiceno first choiceno first choicenothing named
Perplexity Sonar Prono first choiceno first choiceno first choiceno first choiceno first choicenothing named
Bold is the first choiceAlternatives are counted; the count opens them.What the answer argued against
The record
One row per call: the version string exactly as returned, whether the model searched, sources cited, and latency. Full answer text is in the free responses file. Download the record
Zero rows: every prompt, every model, every answer.
| Prompt | Model | Version string | Time (UTC) | Searched | Sources | Latency |
|---|
Normalization in this category
Every judgment call made between the raw labels and the numbers above, listed so it is visible and reversible.
ShowHide
Category-scoped readings
Conga read as Conga CLM
Coupa read as Coupa CLM
Icertis read as Icertis Contract Intelligence
SAP Ariba read as SAP Ariba Contracts
Workday read as Workday Contract Intelligence
Workday (Evisort) read as Workday Contract Intelligence
Unresolved, counted raw
Agiloft Contract Management Suite
Ariba Contract Management (SAP)
Bind Legal
Corcentric / Determine
DocuSign Contract Insights
Everlaw
Exari
Google Docs + HelloSign/SignWell
Legistify
Seal Software
Thomson Reuters CoCounsel
Discontinued, still offered
No shut-down product was recommended here.