Juro vs GetAccept
Six of twelve models named Juro first on the direct prompt; zero named GetAccept. Juro was named by eleven of the twelve models and GetAccept by seven and Juro carries 31 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.
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
JuroFirst choices, of twelve modelsGetAccept
Every model, every framing
| 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 | | |
Juro GetAccept first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Juro on the left and GetAccept on the right.The direct prompt
Juro first, GetAccept not the choice
6 of 12 modelsGetAccept was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.Neither was the first choice, one was named
2 of 12 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.Neither was named
4 of 12 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.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
Juro16%#2 of 16GetAccept4%#7 of 16What the models said about Juro
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Five of six in this category shown.
“Verdict: Approach with caution if you require strong reporting, flexibility, and advanced collaboration features” GLM 4.7 FlashX · negative prompt · soft negative
“typically starts around $15,000–$30,000/year (Juro, SpotDraft, Ironclad)” Kimi K2 · budget prompt · soft negative
“Juro is the strongest overall pick—best user experience, fast deployment, and pricing that scales with contract volume” DeepSeek V4 Flash · direct prompt · first choice
“Juro is a browser-native contract automation platform built specifically for fast-growing mid-market companies.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“If you want one practical default recommendation, I'd pick Juro for a typical mid-market B2B company” Perplexity Sonar · 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
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.