Contract lifecycle management and e-signature for enterprise buyers
Asked as “contract lifecycle management platform”, and as “e-signature and contract management tool”, on behalf of an enterprise B2B company. 56 first choices recorded across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, fourteen models each.
Standing · first-choice share
21%
Contested · Ironclad 18%
21Icertis Contract Intelligence18Ironclad14DocuSign CLM46others
21% of first choices, contested.
Since September 2026↗new leaderNew leader since September 2026: Icertis Contract Intelligence (22%) replaces Ironclad (22% then, 18% now), 4 points clear, inside the 11-point floor.Icertis Contract Intelligence leads at 22%, replacing Ironclad, which led at 22% and stands at 18% now: 4 points clear, inside the floor, so the swap reads as unsettled.
By buyer segment
The same question asked on behalf of a different buyer. Each standing is computed within its segment; they sit side by side and are never added together.
Small business
PandaDoc43%Clear leader▼−9Since September 2026: 47% → 38%, −9 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.Standing →Mid-marketPandaDoc23%Contested=heldSince September 2026: 25% → 25%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.Standing →Enterprise
Icertis Contract Intelligence21%Contested↗new leaderNew leader since September 2026: Icertis Contract Intelligence (22%) replaces Ironclad (22% then, 18% now), 4 points clear, inside the 11-point floor.This page
PandaDoc43%Clear leader▼−9Since September 2026: 47% → 38%, −9 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.Standing →Mid-marketPandaDoc23%Contested=heldSince September 2026: 25% → 25%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.Standing →EnterpriseIcertis Contract Intelligence21%Contested↗new leaderNew leader since September 2026: Icertis Contract Intelligence (22%) replaces Ironclad (22% then, 18% now), 4 points clear, inside the 11-point floor.This pageThe standing
Share is the count of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, over all fourteen models, for an enterprise B2B company. Ordered by share.
ProductFirst-choice shareNegative rateLabelsQuadrantSince September 2026
01Icertis Contract Intelligence21%22%58accepted challenger▲+12Since September 2026: 10% → 22%, +12 points. Past the 11-point floor: movement. Read over the models both editions asked.10% → 22%
Icertis Contract Intelligence21%22%58accepted challenger▲+12Since September 2026: 10% → 22%, +12 points. Past the 11-point floor: movement. Read over the models both editions asked.10% → 22%02
Ironclad18%17%53accepted challenger▼−4Since September 2026: 22% → 18%, −4 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.22% → 18%
Ironclad18%17%53accepted challenger▼−4Since September 2026: 22% → 18%, −4 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.22% → 18%03
DocuSign CLM14%20%49accepted challenger▲+5Since September 2026: 8% → 12%, +5 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.8% → 12%
DocuSign CLM14%20%49accepted challenger▲+5Since September 2026: 8% → 12%, +5 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.8% → 12%04
Agiloft9%11%44accepted challenger▼−2Since September 2026: 10% → 8%, −2 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.10% → 8%
Agiloft9%11%44accepted challenger▼−2Since September 2026: 10% → 8%, −2 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.10% → 8%05
DocuSign7%9%11accepted challenger▼−12Since September 2026: 20% → 8%, −12 points. Past the 11-point floor: movement. Read over the models both editions asked.20% → 8%
DocuSign7%9%11accepted challenger▼−12Since September 2026: 20% → 8%, −12 points. Past the 11-point floor: movement. Read over the models both editions asked.20% → 8%06
ContractSafe5%33%12criticized challenger▼−4Since September 2026: 10% → 6%, −4 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.10% → 6%
ContractSafe5%33%12criticized challenger▼−4Since September 2026: 10% → 6%, −4 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.10% → 6%07
Sirion4%7%29accepted challenger▼−8Since September 2026: 12% → 4%, −8 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.12% → 4%
Sirion4%7%29accepted challenger▼−8Since September 2026: 12% → 4%, −8 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.12% → 4%08
ContractWorks4%45%11criticized challenger▲+4Since September 2026: 0% → 4%, +4 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.0% → 4%
ContractWorks4%45%11criticized challenger▲+4Since September 2026: 0% → 4%, +4 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.0% → 4%09
Conga CLM2%28%39criticized challenger▲+2Since September 2026: 0% → 2%, +2 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.0% → 2%
Conga CLM2%28%39criticized challenger▲+2Since September 2026: 0% → 2%, +2 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.0% → 2%10
Concord2%17%12accepted challenger▲+2Since September 2026: 0% → 2%, +2 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.0% → 2%
Concord2%17%12accepted challenger▲+2Since September 2026: 0% → 2%, +2 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.0% → 2%11
SpotDraft2%20%10accepted challenger▲+2Since September 2026: 0% → 2%, +2 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.0% → 2%
SpotDraft2%20%10accepted challenger▲+2Since September 2026: 0% → 2%, +2 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.0% → 2%Show the three products at 0%, ordered by negative rate
14SAP Ariba Contracts0%30%10criticized challenger=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.0% → 0%
13
LinkSquares0%29%14criticized challenger=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.0% → 0%
LinkSquares0%29%14criticized challenger=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.0% → 0%12
Adobe Acrobat Sign0%12%16accepted challenger=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.0% → 0%
Adobe Acrobat Sign0%12%16accepted challenger=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.0% → 0%The floor is 11 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. Movement is read over the twelve models both editions asked; GPT-6 Luna, Muse Glimmer 30B joined this edition and are in the standing but not yet in the comparison. 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 twenty-eight head-to-head pages: the top eight products, each against each
PandaDoc vs Zoho ContractsPandaDoc vs DocuSign CLMPandaDoc vs DocuSignPandaDoc vs Conga CLMConcord vs JuroConcord vs IroncladConcord vs Zoho ContractsConcord vs DocuSign CLMConcord vs DocuSignConcord vs Conga CLMJuro vs IroncladJuro vs Zoho ContractsJuro vs DocuSign CLMJuro vs DocuSignJuro vs Conga CLMIronclad vs Zoho ContractsIronclad vs DocuSign CLMIronclad vs DocuSignIronclad vs Conga CLMZoho Contracts vs DocuSign CLMZoho Contracts vs DocuSignZoho Contracts vs Conga CLMDocuSign CLM vs DocuSignDocuSign CLM vs Conga CLMDocuSign vs Conga CLM
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 →
01020304050607080910111213S14
Accepted challengerEndorsed leader
0%First-choice share → · lines at 30% share and 25% negative40%
Key
01Icertis Contract Intelligence21%
Icertis Contract Intelligence21%02Ironclad18%
Ironclad18%03DocuSign CLM14%
DocuSign CLM14%04Agiloft9%
Agiloft9%05DocuSign7%
DocuSign7%06ContractSafe5%
ContractSafe5%07Sirion4%
Sirion4%08ContractWorks4%
ContractWorks4%09Conga CLM2%
Conga CLM2%10Concord2%
Concord2%11SpotDraft2%
SpotDraft2%12Adobe Acrobat Sign0%
Adobe Acrobat Sign0%13LinkSquares0%
LinkSquares0%14SAP Ariba Contracts0%
What they warned about
One of fourteen models held their first choice under the paraphrase. Claude Haiku 4.5, GPT-5.4 mini, Perplexity Sonar, Grok 4.1 Fast, Mistral Small, DeepSeek V4 Flash, Llama 4 Maverick, Qwen 3.7 Flash, Kimi K2, GLM 4.7 FlashX, MiniMax M2.5, GPT-6 Luna and Muse Glimmer 30B changed. 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.
Icertis Contract Intelligence22%
13 of 58 labels negative · 11 of 14 models · 2 hard negative
“Stay away from Ironclad and Icertis unless you have a legal operations team large enough” DeepSeek V4 Flash, budget prompt
Conga CLM28%
11 of 39 labels negative · 11 of 14 models
“Conga CLM works best for companies already using Salesforce, limiting standalone flexibility, and its interface can feel complex for first-time users” Claude Haiku 4.5, negative prompt
Ironclad17%
9 of 53 labels negative · 7 of 14 models · 2 hard negative
“avoid named-user / value-based enterprise CLMs such as Icertis and Ironclad” Muse Glimmer 30B, budget prompt
DocuSign CLM20%
10 of 49 labels negative · 7 of 14 models
“DocuSign CLM has reported limitations with customization options and challenges with customer support responsiveness and administrative flexibility” Claude Haiku 4.5, negative prompt
What they cite
Citations exist only for the models that return a source list: fourteen of the fourteen in this edition, and all six flagship models on the expanded tier.
Sites the answers cite
79 of 84 answers in this category came back with a source list, from 14 of 14 models: citations where the model returns them, or the search results it consulted. 1143 links across 228 sites, every framing counted. Ranked by the number of answers carrying the site or page. 3 of the 252 answers across every segment cited this index's own page for the category; the method page measures whether that reading tilts an answer.
vendor site · Bind45 answers · 94 citations · 11 models
vendor site · Sirion41 answers · 84 citations · 13 models
vendor site · Conga38 answers · 40 citations · 13 models
vendor site · Zylo29 answers · 29 citations · 11 models
vendor site · Oneflow27 answers · 28 citations · 11 models
26 answers · 30 citations · 11 models
23 answers · 23 citations · 10 models
vendor site · DocuSign22 answers · 26 citations · 10 models
vendor site · Guideflow21 answers · 22 citations · 9 models
vendor site · Quickbase21 answers · 21 citations · 8 models
20 answers · 27 citations · 10 models
vendor site · Concord18 answers · 20 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.
34 answers · 12 models
29 answers · 11 models
24 answers · 10 models
23 answers · 9 models
22 answers · 9 models
21 answers · 8 models
17 answers · 11 models
14 answers · 7 models
14 answers · 7 models
12 answers · 6 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 | Best Google position |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DocuSign docusign.com DocuSign CLM 14%, DocuSign 7%, DocuSign eSignature 4%, DocuSign IAM + CLM 2% | 27% | 110 | 1,000,000 | 9,641 | 2,280,470 | $20 | 120 | |
| Icertis Contract Intelligence icertis.com | 21% | 94 | 140 | 2 | 173,589 | 29 | ||
| Ironclad ironcladapp.com | 18% | 133 | 49,500 | 3,365 | 128,319 | 120 | ||
| Agiloft agiloft.com | 9% | 87 | 3,600 | 61 | 12,773 | $23,523 | 17 | 2 |
| ContractSafe contractsafe.com | 5% | 63 | 1,000 | 7 | 38,687 | $687 | 120 | |
| Sirion sirion.ai Sirion 4%, SirionLabs 0% | 4% | 54 | 1,600 | 99 | 302,031 | $1,680 | 28 | |
| Juro juro.com | 4% | 62 | 2,900 | 536 | 44,442 | $168 | 120 | |
| ContractWorks contractworks.com | 4% | 33 | 720 | 3 | 1,720 | 1 | ||
| Conga CLM conga.com | 2% | 77 | 480 | 11 | 46,363 | $224 | 120 | |
| Concord concord.app | 2% | 89 | 246,000 | 58,369 | 18,445 |
Google's top ten for the two searches hold 17 sites; 2 of them are among the sites the models cited here (g2.com, guideflow.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 an enterprise B2B company?”Paraphrase“Which e-signature and contract management tool would you recommend to a large B2B company with thousands of employees?”Comparative“What are the top enterprise-grade contract lifecycle management platforms and how do they differ?”Budget-constrained“What is the best contract lifecycle management platform for a large company that needs predictable total cost across thousands of users?”Scale-constrained“We are a 5,000 person company with SSO, SOC 2 and procurement review requirements evaluating a contract lifecycle management platform. What should we look at?”Negative“Which contract lifecycle management platforms should a large enterprise avoid or be cautious about?”
Claude Haiku 4.5no first choiceDocuSign CLMChangedno first choiceContractSafeno first choiceagainst: Agiloft, Conga CLM, DocuSign CLM, Icertis Contract Intelligence
Five alternatives
Agiloft, DocuSign CLM, Icertis Contract Intelligence, Ironclad, Workday CLMOne alternative
IroncladTwo alternatives
Agiloft, Icertis Contract IntelligenceGPT-5.4 miniIcertis Contract IntelligenceDocuSign IAM + CLMChangedIcertis Contract IntelligenceContractWorksno first choicenothing named
Three alternatives
Ironclad, Ivalua, SirionTwo alternatives
Adobe Acrobat Sign, IroncladEleven alternatives
Agiloft, Conga CLM, Coupa CLM, DocuSign CLM, GEP, Ironclad, Ivalua, JAGGAER, SAP Ariba Contracts, SAP CLM, SirionTwo alternatives
Conga CLM, DocuSign CLMGemini 3.5 FlashIroncladIroncladHeldIcertis Contract Intelligence, IroncladAgiloftagainst: Icertis Contract Intelligence, IroncladIroncladagainst: Adobe Acrobat Sign, Concord, Conga CLM, ContractSafe, DocuSign CLM, Icertis Contract Intelligence, Oracle Contract Management, SAP Ariba Contracts
Four alternatives
Conga CLM, DocuSign CLM, Icertis Contract Intelligence, SirionThree alternatives
Adobe Acrobat Sign, Conga CLM, DocuSign CLMThree alternatives
Agiloft, DocuSign CLM, SirionThree alternatives
CobbleStone Software, ContractSafe, GatekeeperFour alternatives
Conga CLM, Icertis Contract Intelligence, LinkSquares, Workday CLMPerplexity SonarIcertis Contract IntelligenceDocuSign CLM, DocuSign eSignatureChangedno first choiceIcertis Contract Intelligenceno first choiceagainst: Conga CLM, ContractSafe, ContractWorks, ContractZen, Contractbook, Oneflow, PandaDoc
Four alternatives
Agiloft, DocuSign CLM, Ironclad, SirionThree alternatives
Adobe Acrobat Sign, Icertis Contract Intelligence, IroncladTwo alternatives
DocuSign CLM, SirionGrok 4.1 FastIcertis Contract Intelligence, Sirionagainst: IroncladDocuSignChangedIcertis Contract IntelligenceDocuSign CLMagainst: CobbleStone, Conga CLM, ContractSafe, Juro, SpotDraftno first choiceagainst: Agiloft, DocuSign CLM, Icertis Contract Intelligence, Ironclad
Two alternatives
Agiloft, DocuSign CLMThree alternatives
Icertis Contract Intelligence, Ironclad, SirionSix alternatives
Agiloft, Conga CLM, ContractPodAi, DocuSign CLM, Ironclad, SirionFour alternatives
Agiloft, Icertis Contract Intelligence, Ironclad, SirionMistral SmallIcertis Contract IntelligenceDocuSign eSignature, Icertis Contract IntelligenceChangedIcertis Contract IntelligenceSpotDraftagainst: Icertis Contract IntelligenceIroncladagainst: LinkSquares, PandaDocagainst: Conga CLM, ContractWorks, DocuSign CLM, Workday CLM
Two alternatives
Conga CLM, DocuSign CLMThree alternatives
Adobe Acrobat Sign, ContractPodAi, PandaDocFour alternatives
Conga CLM, ContractPodAi, Ironclad, SpotDraftOne alternative
DocuSign CLMThree alternatives
Agiloft, DocuSign CLM, Icertis Contract IntelligenceDeepSeek V4 FlashIroncladDocuSignChangedIcertis Contract Intelligence, Sirionagainst: SAP Ariba ContractsAgiloftagainst: Gatekeeper, Icertis Contract Intelligence, Ironcladno first choiceagainst: Agiloft, Concur CLM, Conga CLM, SAP Ariba Contracts, Salesforce CLM bolt-ons, SharePoint-based "CLM" solutions, Workday CLM
Four alternatives
Agiloft, DocuSign, Icertis Contract Intelligence, SirionThree alternatives
Adobe Acrobat Sign, Icertis Contract Intelligence, IroncladFour alternatives
Agiloft, Conga CLM, DocuSign CLM, IroncladThree alternatives
DocuSign CLM, Juro, SpotDraftLlama 4 MaverickIroncladno first choiceChangedno first choiceIroncladno first choiceagainst: ContractWorks
Five alternatives
Agiloft, Conga CLM, DocuSign CLM, Icertis Contract Intelligence, OneflowQwen 3.7 FlashIcertis Contract Intelligence, Sirion LabsDocuSign CLMChangedIcertis Contract IntelligenceConcord, Juroagainst: DocuSign, Icertis Contract Intelligence, Ironclad, SalesforceConga CLM, DocuSign CLM, Icertis Contract Intelligence, Ironcladagainst: Agiloft, Conga CLM, Documentum, Kissflow, Mendix, MuleSoft, OutSystems, Salesforce CLM / CPQ, SpringCM, Zoho Creator, iManage
Three alternatives
Conga CLM, DocuSign CLM, IroncladFour alternatives
Conga CLM, PandaDoc, SirionLabs, airSlate SignNowFive alternatives
Agiloft, Concord, Conga CLM, DocuSign CLM, IroncladOne alternative
ContractWorksKimi K2SirionDocuSign CLM, Icertis Contract IntelligenceChangedIcertis Contract Intelligenceagainst: DocuSign CLMContractSafe, ContractWorksagainst: Concord, Icertis Contract Intelligence, Ironcladno first choiceagainst: DocuSign CLMagainst: Conga CLM, DocuSign CLM, Icertis Contract Intelligence, LinkSquares
Four alternatives
Agiloft, DocuSign CLM, Icertis Contract Intelligence, IroncladTwo alternatives
Adobe Acrobat Sign, IroncladFive alternatives
Agiloft, Conga CLM, Ironclad, LinkSquares, SirionFour alternatives
Agiloft, Icertis Contract Intelligence, Ironclad, SirionGLM 4.7 FlashXIcertis Contract IntelligenceDocuSign, IroncladChangedno first choiceAgiloftno first choiceagainst: ContractSafe, ContractWorks, Icertis Contract Intelligence, Juro, LinkSquares, Sirion, SpotDraft
Six alternatives
Agiloft, Conga CLM, DocuSign CLM, Ironclad, Sirion, Workday CLMThree alternatives
Adobe Acrobat Sign, Concord, PandaDocTwo alternatives
Concord, DocuSign CLMMiniMax M2.5Icertis Contract IntelligenceDocuSignChangedno first choiceAgiloft, ContractSafeagainst: Conga CLM, DocuSign CLM, Icertis Contract Intelligence, Ironclad, SAP CLMno first choiceagainst: Coupa CLMagainst: Coupa CLM, DocuSign CLM, Ironclad, LinkSquares, Sirion
Two alternatives
Conga CLM, IroncladThree alternatives
Adobe Acrobat Sign, Concord, PandaDocOne alternative
ContractWorksGPT-6 LunaIroncladDocuSign CLMChangedIcertis Contract Intelligence, SirionGatekeeperno first choiceagainst: Conga CLM, DocuSign CLM, Icertis Contract Intelligence
Two alternatives
Conga CLM, Icertis Contract IntelligenceThree alternatives
DocuSign eSignature, Icertis Contract Intelligence, IroncladSix alternatives
Agiloft, Conga CLM, Coupa CLM, DocuSign CLM, Ironclad, SAP Ariba ContractsOne alternative
AgiloftMuse Glimmer 30BIcertis Contract IntelligenceDocuSign CLMChangedagainst: Adobe Acrobat SignIcertis Contract Intelligenceagainst: ContractWorksAgiloft, Juroagainst: Icertis Contract Intelligence, Ironcladno first choiceagainst: Agiloft, Conga CLM
Three alternatives
Agiloft, DocuSign CLM, IroncladOne alternative
IroncladSix alternatives
Agiloft, Conga CLM, DocuSign CLM, Ironclad, Sirion, SpotDraftTwo alternatives
Concord, SpotDraftBold 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
Eighty-four rows: every prompt, every model, every answer.
| Prompt | Model | Version string | Time (UTC) | Searched | Sources | Latency |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Direct recommendation | Claude Haiku 4.5 | claude-haiku-4-5-20251001 | 2026-10-01 09:31 | yes | 9 | 8 s |
| Direct recommendation | GPT-5.4 mini | gpt-5.4-mini-2026-03-17 | 2026-10-01 09:11 | yes | 1 | 5 s |
| Direct recommendation | Gemini 3.5 Flash | gemini-3.5-flash | 2026-10-01 12:54 | yes | 14 | 26 s |
| Direct recommendation | Perplexity Sonar | sonar | 2026-10-01 09:45 | yes | 19 | 5 s |
| Direct recommendation | Grok 4.1 Fast | spacexai/grok-4.1-fast-non-reasoning via vertex | 2026-10-01 10:35 | yes | 21 | 14 s |
| Direct recommendation | Mistral Small | mistral/mistral-small via mistral | 2026-10-01 13:09 | yes | 13 | 6 s |
| Direct recommendation | DeepSeek V4 Flash | deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash via deepinfra | 2026-10-01 08:21 | yes | 24 | 30 s |
| Direct recommendation | Llama 4 Maverick | meta/llama-4-maverick via bedrock | 2026-10-01 11:29 | yes | 5 | 2 s |
| Direct recommendation | Qwen 3.7 Flash | alibaba/qwen3.7-flash via alibaba | 2026-10-01 11:29 | yes | 5 | 25 s |
| Direct recommendation | Kimi K2 | moonshotai/kimi-k2 via novita | 2026-10-01 11:50 | yes | 18 | 26 s |
| Direct recommendation | GLM 4.7 FlashX | zai/glm-4.7-flashx via zai | 2026-10-01 12:14 | yes | 17 | 90 s |
| Direct recommendation | MiniMax M2.5 | minimax/minimax-m2.5 via minimax | 2026-10-01 13:36 | yes | 5 | 18 s |
| Direct recommendation | GPT-6 Luna | gpt-6-luna | 2026-10-01 09:31 | yes | 4 | 13 s |
| Direct recommendation | Muse Glimmer 30B | meta/muse-glimmer-30b via togetherai | 2026-10-01 07:25 | yes | 14 | 18 s |
| Paraphrase | Claude Haiku 4.5 | claude-haiku-4-5-20251001 | 2026-10-01 10:09 | yes | 18 | 9 s |
| Paraphrase | GPT-5.4 mini | gpt-5.4-mini-2026-03-17 | 2026-10-01 13:00 | yes | 4 | 5 s |
| Paraphrase | Gemini 3.5 Flash | gemini-3.5-flash | 2026-10-01 13:48 | yes | 11 | 20 s |
| Paraphrase | Perplexity Sonar | sonar | 2026-10-01 13:19 | yes | 20 | 3 s |
| Paraphrase | Grok 4.1 Fast | spacexai/grok-4.1-fast-non-reasoning via vertex | 2026-10-01 12:56 | yes | 22 | 7 s |
| Paraphrase | Mistral Small | mistral/mistral-small via mistral | 2026-10-01 11:55 | yes | 14 | 8 s |
| Paraphrase | DeepSeek V4 Flash | deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash via deepinfra | 2026-10-01 08:27 | yes | 24 | 25 s |
| Paraphrase | Llama 4 Maverick | meta/llama-4-maverick via bedrock | 2026-10-01 11:29 | yes | 5 | 1 s |
| Paraphrase | Qwen 3.7 Flash | alibaba/qwen3.7-flash via alibaba | 2026-10-01 12:42 | yes | 9 | 27 s |
| Paraphrase | Kimi K2 | moonshotai/kimi-k2 via novita | 2026-10-01 09:29 | yes | 15 | 21 s |
| Paraphrase | GLM 4.7 FlashX | zai/glm-4.7-flashx via zai | 2026-10-01 14:09 | yes | 18 | 26 s |
| Paraphrase | MiniMax M2.5 | minimax/minimax-m2.5 via minimax | 2026-10-01 10:05 | yes | 5 | 26 s |
| Paraphrase | GPT-6 Luna | gpt-6-luna | 2026-10-01 11:21 | yes | 3 | 11 s |
| Paraphrase | Muse Glimmer 30B | meta/muse-glimmer-30b via togetherai | 2026-10-01 13:31 | yes | 13 | 20 s |
| Comparative | Claude Haiku 4.5 | claude-haiku-4-5-20251001 | 2026-10-01 10:55 | yes | 9 | 10 s |
| Comparative | GPT-5.4 mini | gpt-5.4-mini-2026-03-17 | 2026-10-01 07:24 | yes | 7 | 11 s |
| Comparative | Gemini 3.5 Flash | gemini-3.5-flash | 2026-10-01 09:22 | yes | 22 | 28 s |
| Comparative | Perplexity Sonar | sonar | 2026-10-01 08:55 | yes | 18 | 4 s |
| Comparative | Grok 4.1 Fast | spacexai/grok-4.1-fast-non-reasoning via vertex | 2026-10-01 10:59 | yes | 24 | 10 s |
| Comparative | Mistral Small | mistral/mistral-small via mistral | 2026-10-01 09:14 | yes | 15 | 10 s |
| Comparative | DeepSeek V4 Flash | deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash via deepinfra | 2026-10-01 11:32 | yes | 24 | 37 s |
| Comparative | Llama 4 Maverick | meta/llama-4-maverick via bedrock | 2026-10-01 08:40 | yes | 5 | 1 s |
| Comparative | Qwen 3.7 Flash | alibaba/qwen3.7-flash via alibaba | 2026-10-01 12:59 | yes | 9 | 23 s |
| Comparative | Kimi K2 | moonshotai/kimi-k2 via novita | 2026-10-01 10:28 | yes | 14 | 29 s |
| Comparative | GLM 4.7 FlashX | zai/glm-4.7-flashx via zai | 2026-10-01 09:29 | yes | 17 | 41 s |
| Comparative | MiniMax M2.5 | minimax/minimax-m2.5 via minimax | 2026-10-01 14:13 | yes | 25 | 30 s |
| Comparative | GPT-6 Luna | gpt-6-luna | 2026-10-01 13:46 | yes | 9 | 39 s |
| Comparative | Muse Glimmer 30B | meta/muse-glimmer-30b via togetherai | 2026-10-01 09:37 | yes | 14 | 30 s |
| Budget constrained | Claude Haiku 4.5 | claude-haiku-4-5-20251001 | 2026-10-01 10:37 | yes | 19 | 8 s |
| Budget constrained | GPT-5.4 mini | gpt-5.4-mini-2026-03-17 | 2026-10-01 07:57 | yes | 3 | 6 s |
| Budget constrained | Gemini 3.5 Flash | gemini-3.5-flash | 2026-10-01 13:54 | yes | 29 | 33 s |
| Budget constrained | Perplexity Sonar | sonar | 2026-10-01 08:09 | yes | 20 | 4 s |
| Budget constrained | Grok 4.1 Fast | spacexai/grok-4.1-fast-non-reasoning via vertex | 2026-10-01 09:13 | yes | 22 | 16 s |
| Budget constrained | Mistral Small | mistral/mistral-small via mistral | 2026-10-01 12:23 | yes | 5 | 3 s |
| Budget constrained | DeepSeek V4 Flash | deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash via deepinfra | 2026-10-01 11:16 | yes | 22 | 47 s |
| Budget constrained | Llama 4 Maverick | meta/llama-4-maverick via bedrock | 2026-10-01 09:07 | yes | 5 | 1 s |
| Budget constrained | Qwen 3.7 Flash | alibaba/qwen3.7-flash via alibaba | 2026-10-01 12:43 | yes | 10 | 63 s |
| Budget constrained | Kimi K2 | moonshotai/kimi-k2 via novita | 2026-10-01 10:36 | yes | 23 | 34 s |
| Budget constrained | GLM 4.7 FlashX | zai/glm-4.7-flashx via zai | 2026-10-01 12:32 | yes | 22 | 100 s |
| Budget constrained | MiniMax M2.5 | minimax/minimax-m2.5 via minimax | 2026-10-01 12:10 | yes | 20 | 46 s |
| Budget constrained | GPT-6 Luna | gpt-6-luna | 2026-10-01 09:35 | yes | 2 | 16 s |
| Budget constrained | Muse Glimmer 30B | meta/muse-glimmer-30b via togetherai | 2026-10-01 08:52 | yes | 22 | 40 s |
| Scale constrained | Claude Haiku 4.5 | claude-haiku-4-5-20251001 | 2026-10-01 08:51 | yes | 18 | 13 s |
| Scale constrained | GPT-5.4 mini | gpt-5.4-mini-2026-03-17 | 2026-10-01 14:16 | no | 0 | 5 s |
| Scale constrained | Gemini 3.5 Flash | gemini-3.5-flash | 2026-10-01 12:56 | no | 0 | 17 s |
| Scale constrained | Perplexity Sonar | sonar | 2026-10-01 08:00 | yes | 18 | 7 s |
| Scale constrained | Grok 4.1 Fast | spacexai/grok-4.1-fast-non-reasoning via vertex | 2026-10-01 09:48 | yes | 13 | 15 s |
| Scale constrained | Mistral Small | mistral/mistral-small via mistral | 2026-10-01 12:59 | no | 0 | 8 s |
| Scale constrained | DeepSeek V4 Flash | deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash via deepinfra | 2026-10-01 09:13 | yes | 20 | 51 s |
| Scale constrained | Llama 4 Maverick | meta/llama-4-maverick via bedrock | 2026-10-01 12:08 | yes | 5 | 3 s |
| Scale constrained | Qwen 3.7 Flash | alibaba/qwen3.7-flash via alibaba | 2026-10-01 07:45 | no | 0 | 30 s |
| Scale constrained | Kimi K2 | moonshotai/kimi-k2 via novita | 2026-10-01 12:56 | yes | 19 | 28 s |
| Scale constrained | GLM 4.7 FlashX | zai/glm-4.7-flashx via zai | 2026-10-01 12:31 | yes | 24 | 61 s |
| Scale constrained | MiniMax M2.5 | minimax/minimax-m2.5 via minimax | 2026-10-01 08:22 | yes | 5 | 21 s |
| Scale constrained | GPT-6 Luna | gpt-6-luna | 2026-10-01 09:24 | yes | 2 | 20 s |
| Scale constrained | Muse Glimmer 30B | meta/muse-glimmer-30b via togetherai | 2026-10-01 12:53 | yes | 12 | 27 s |
| Negative framing | Claude Haiku 4.5 | claude-haiku-4-5-20251001 | 2026-10-01 12:58 | yes | 18 | 9 s |
| Negative framing | GPT-5.4 mini | gpt-5.4-mini-2026-03-17 | 2026-10-01 08:15 | yes | 5 | 8 s |
| Negative framing | Gemini 3.5 Flash | gemini-3.5-flash | 2026-10-01 13:00 | yes | 25 | 30 s |
| Negative framing | Perplexity Sonar | sonar | 2026-10-01 13:09 | yes | 19 | 4 s |
| Negative framing | Grok 4.1 Fast | spacexai/grok-4.1-fast-non-reasoning via vertex | 2026-10-01 11:20 | yes | 22 | 11 s |
| Negative framing | Mistral Small | mistral/mistral-small via mistral | 2026-10-01 13:37 | yes | 5 | 5 s |
| Negative framing | DeepSeek V4 Flash | deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash via deepinfra | 2026-10-01 08:23 | yes | 24 | 59 s |
| Negative framing | Llama 4 Maverick | meta/llama-4-maverick via bedrock | 2026-10-01 07:56 | yes | 5 | 2 s |
| Negative framing | Qwen 3.7 Flash | alibaba/qwen3.7-flash via alibaba | 2026-10-01 07:55 | no | 0 | 31 s |
| Negative framing | Kimi K2 | moonshotai/kimi-k2 via novita | 2026-10-01 12:42 | yes | 23 | 27 s |
| Negative framing | GLM 4.7 FlashX | zai/glm-4.7-flashx via zai | 2026-10-01 10:21 | yes | 24 | 37 s |
| Negative framing | MiniMax M2.5 | minimax/minimax-m2.5 via minimax | 2026-10-01 08:41 | yes | 25 | 43 s |
| Negative framing | GPT-6 Luna | gpt-6-luna | 2026-10-01 11:21 | yes | 4 | 24 s |
| Negative framing | Muse Glimmer 30B | meta/muse-glimmer-30b via togetherai | 2026-10-01 12:17 | yes | 22 | 39 s |
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
Conga (by OpenText) read as Conga CLM
Conga (formerly Apttus) 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
Zoho read as Zoho Contracts
Unresolved, counted raw
Aavenir
Concur CLM
DocuSign IAM + CLM
Documentum
Inhubber
Mendix
OneSpan
Oracle Contract Management
OutSystems
Pramata
Salesforce
Salesforce CLM / CPQ
Salesforce CLM bolt-ons
SharePoint-based "CLM" solutions
Sirion Labs
SpringCM
SutiCLM
Worksuite
airSlate SignNow
iManage
Discontinued, still offered
No shut-down product was recommended here.