Contract lifecycle management and e-signature · September 2026 Edition
Ironclad vs GetAccept
Four of twelve models named Ironclad first on the direct prompt; zero named GetAccept. Ironclad was named by twelve of the twelve models and GetAccept by seven and Ironclad carries 48 labels and GetAccept 13, so the shares are not directly comparable.
Named in one category this edition.
founded 2015. Named in four categories this edition.
First-choice share12%4%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate31%0%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#3#7A position in a field of 16; printed, not drawn.
Labels4813A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, Ironclad reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.Juro was named alongside these two in eight of the twelve direct answers. PandaDoc vs Ironclad · PandaDoc vs GetAccept · Juro vs Ironclad
Share is the count of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts over all twelve models, for a mid-market B2B company; rank is within the category; every quote names the model and the prompt it came from. Both figures come from the contract lifecycle management and e-signature page.
By framing
How many of the twelve models made each the first choice, per way of asking, and how many argued against it.
IroncladFirst choices, of twelve modelsGetAccept
Direct40
Paraphrase02
Comparative40
Budget-constrained006 against Ironclad
Scale-constrained201 against Ironclad
Negative108 against Ironclad
Bars are first choices, 0 to 12 each sideModels that argued againstA model can name both, so the two sides of a row do not sum to twelve.
Every model, every framing
The seventy-two answers behind the chart above, one cell each: where Ironclad and GetAccept stood in it.
| Model | Direct | Paraphrase | Comparative | Budget-constrained | Scale-constrained | Negative |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | | | | |||
| GPT-5.4 mini | | | | |||
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | | | | | | |
| 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 | | | | |
Ironclad GetAccept first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Ironclad on the left and GetAccept on the right.The direct prompt
The plain question, one answer per model, grouped by where Ironclad and GetAccept stood in it.
Ironclad first, GetAccept not the choice
4 of 12 modelsGetAccept was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.Claude Haiku 4.5Ironclad alternatives: Juro, LinkSquares, SpotDraft
GPT-5.4 miniIronclad alternatives: Conga CLM, DocuSign CLM
Gemini 3.5 FlashIronclad, Juro alternatives: Gatekeeper, LinkSquares, SpotDraft, Stackpack
Grok 4.1 FastIronclad, Juro alternatives: Concord, DocuSign CLM, LinkSquares, SpotDraft
Neither was the first choice, one was named
7 of 12 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.Perplexity SonarJuro alternatives: Ironclad, LinkSquares, SpotDraft
Mistral SmallLinkSquares alternatives: DealHub, Ironclad, Juro
DeepSeek V4 FlashJuro alternatives: Concord, Conga CLM, DocuSign CLM, Ironclad, PandaDoc, Salesforce Service Cloud, SpotDraft
Qwen 3.7 FlashMalbek alternatives: Conga CLM, Gatekeeper, Ironclad, Zoho Contracts
Kimi K2Juro, SpotDraft alternatives: Bind, Concord, Ironclad, PandaDoc
GLM 4.7 FlashXConcord, Juro alternatives: Agiloft, Ironclad
MiniMax M2.5LinkSquares alternatives: Contractbook, Ironclad
Neither was named
1 of 12 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.Llama 4 Maverickno first choice
Bold names in an answer are the products the judge labeled a first choice; a model naming several gives each of them that label. The full answer text for every row is in the record.
By buyer segment
The same question asked on behalf of a different buyer. Each standing is computed within its segment and they are never added together. The figures above are the mid-market standing, which is the one the category orders by.
Small business
GetAccept leads by four points.
GetAccept4%#5 of 15Ironclad0%#15 of 15Mid-marketThe figures above
The order flips: Ironclad leads at mid-market.
Ironclad12%#3 of 16GetAccept4%#7 of 16Enterprise
Ironclad leads by twenty-two points.
Ironclad22%#1 of 8GetAccept0%#– of 8What the models said about Ironclad
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Six of eight in this category shown.
“Avoid enterprise platforms (Ironclad, DocuSign CLM) - typically start at $20,000-50,000/year” Mistral Small · budget prompt · hard negative
“Enterprise tools like Ironclad/DocuSign CLM start at $20K+/yr, so avoid for budgets.” Grok 4.1 Fast · budget prompt · hard negative
“Avoid enterprise CLMs like Ironclad, DocuSign CLM, Agiloft, or ContractPodAi” DeepSeek V4 Flash · budget prompt · hard negative
“The standard for fast-growing mid-market companies. Incredible, visual, drag-and-drop workflow designer and best-in-class Salesforce integration.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · scale prompt · first choice
“focus your search on no-code, collaborative, and AI-native CLMs (such as Ironclad, Juro, LinkSquares, or ContractSafe)” Gemini 3.5 Flash · negative prompt · first choice
“Ironclad is a leader in AI-powered contract lifecycle management, particularly for mid-market and enterprise legal teams.” Claude Haiku 4.5 · direct prompt · first choice
What the models said about GetAccept
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. One of one in this category shown.
“The best e-signature and contract management tools for mid-sized B2B companies are: 1. GetAccept” Llama 4 Maverick · paraphrase prompt · first choice
Also compared
PandaDoc vs IroncladPandaDoc vs GetAcceptJuro vs IroncladJuro vs GetAcceptIronclad vs ConcordIronclad vs SpotDraftIronclad vs LinkSquaresIronclad vs ContractWorksConcord vs GetAcceptSpotDraft vs GetAcceptLinkSquares vs GetAcceptGetAccept vs ContractWorksAll twenty-eight head-to-head pages and the full CLM standing
Comparisons are drawn for the top eight products in each category, each against each. The output is the models' output; nothing here is a recommendation by the index.