Filevine vs Harvey
A side-by-side comparison of Filevine and Harvey, two Legal tools, drawn from Ignaite's continuously-verified listings.
Compared from listings verified as of
At a glance
| Attribute | Filevine | Harvey |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Legal | Legal |
| Pricing | PAID | PAID |
| License | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Deployment | Cloud | Cloud |
| Platforms | Web | Web |
| Model support | Multi-model | Multi-model |
| Vendor (differs) | Filevine | Harvey AI |
| Capabilities (differs) |
|
|
The honest brief
Filevine
Firm-wide AI agents that execute legal work end-to-end inside a full case-management system, not just a standalone research or drafting chatbot.
- Agents execute work, not just summarize
- Built on a large legal-matter graph
- Full case and practice management
- Source traceability on outputs
- Used by large firms and enterprises
- No public pricing (demo only)
- Geared to firms and legal ops
- AI outcome claims vendor-reported
Harvey
The default general-purpose legal AI at scale: Vault analyzes up to ~100K-doc collections, used across AmLaw 100 firms.
- Adopted by most AmLaw 100 firms
- Bulk doc analysis via Vault
- Grounds answers in firm's own materials
- Operates across 60 countries
- No public pricing, sales-only
- ~$1,000+/lawyer/mo, 20-seat minimum
- Tuned to big-firm billable workflows
- Heavy enterprise onboarding
When to pick which
Both cover Contract drafting and Legal research.
Pick Filevine if you need Document parsing (structured), Case management, and Contract lifecycle (CLM).
- Document parsing (structured) (secondary capability)
- Case management (primary capability)
- Contract lifecycle (CLM) (secondary capability)
Pick Harvey if you need Chat with documents and Contract review.
- Chat with documents (secondary capability)
- Contract review (secondary capability)
Harvey leans on Legal research as a headline capability; Filevine treats it as secondary.
- Legal research (primary capability)