GTM AI Index
Index Revenue operations CLM › SpotDraft vs GetAccept
Contract lifecycle management and e-signature · September 2026 Edition

SpotDraft vs GetAccept

One of twelve models named SpotDraft first on the direct prompt; zero named GetAccept. SpotDraft was named by seven of the twelve models and GetAccept by seven and SpotDraft carries 19 labels and GetAccept 13, so the shares are not directly comparable.

SpotDraft

accepted challenger

Named in one category this edition.

GetAccept

accepted challenger

founded 2015. Named in four categories this edition.

First-choice share6%4%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate11%0%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#5#7A position in a field of 16; printed, not drawn.
Labels1913A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, SpotDraft reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.Ironclad was named alongside these two in eleven of the twelve direct answers. PandaDoc vs SpotDraft · PandaDoc vs GetAccept · Juro vs SpotDraft

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.
SpotDraftFirst choices, of twelve modelsGetAccept
Direct10
Paraphrase02
Comparative00
Budget-constrained101 against SpotDraft
Scale-constrained10
Negative001 against SpotDraft
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 SpotDraft and GetAccept stood in it.
ModelDirectParaphraseComparativeBudget-constrainedScale-constrainedNegative
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
SpotDraft GetAccept first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, SpotDraft on the left and GetAccept on the right.

The direct prompt

The plain question, one answer per model, grouped by where SpotDraft and GetAccept stood in it.

SpotDraft first, GetAccept not the choice

1 of 12 modelsGetAccept was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.
Kimi K2Juro, SpotDraft alternatives: Bind, Concord, Ironclad, PandaDoc

Neither was the first choice, one was named

5 of 12 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.
Claude Haiku 4.5Ironclad alternatives: Juro, LinkSquares, SpotDraft
Gemini 3.5 FlashIronclad, Juro alternatives: Gatekeeper, LinkSquares, SpotDraft, Stackpack
Perplexity SonarJuro alternatives: Ironclad, LinkSquares, SpotDraft
Grok 4.1 FastIronclad, Juro alternatives: Concord, DocuSign CLM, LinkSquares, SpotDraft
DeepSeek V4 FlashJuro alternatives: Concord, Conga CLM, DocuSign CLM, Ironclad, PandaDoc, Salesforce Service Cloud, SpotDraft

Neither was named

6 of 12 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.
GPT-5.4 miniIronclad alternatives: Conga CLM, DocuSign CLM
Mistral SmallLinkSquares alternatives: DealHub, Ironclad, Juro
Llama 4 Maverickno first choice
Qwen 3.7 FlashMalbek alternatives: Conga CLM, Gatekeeper, Ironclad, Zoho Contracts
GLM 4.7 FlashXConcord, Juro alternatives: Agiloft, Ironclad
MiniMax M2.5LinkSquares alternatives: Contractbook, Ironclad

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 two points.
GetAccept4%#5 of 15
SpotDraft2%#9 of 15
The full small business standing →
Mid-marketThe figures above
The order flips: SpotDraft leads at mid-market.
SpotDraft6%#5 of 16
GetAccept4%#7 of 16
The full mid-market standing →
Enterprise
Level: the same share of first choices.
SpotDraft0%#– of 8
GetAccept0%#– of 8
The full enterprise standing →

What the models said about SpotDraft

Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Five of six in this category shown.

“Bugs/UI glitches, missing features ... avoid if reliability or advanced editing is key.” Grok 4.1 Fast · negative prompt · soft negative
“typically starts around $15,000–$30,000/year (Juro, SpotDraft, Ironclad)” Kimi K2 · budget prompt · soft negative
“For startups with very limited budgets, SpotDraft's free tier and affordable paid options may be worth evaluating first.” Claude Haiku 4.5 · budget prompt · first choice
“Expected value usually comes fastest from Ironclad, Juro, SpotDraft, or DocuSign CLM” DeepSeek V4 Flash · scale prompt · first choice
“SpotDraft offers the best value (lowest median price, legal-team focus)” Kimi K2 · 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

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.