Harvey vs Luminance
A side-by-side comparison of Harvey and Luminance, two Legal tools, drawn from Ignaite's continuously-verified listings.
Compared from listings verified as of
At a glance
| Attribute | Harvey | Luminance |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Legal | Legal |
| Pricing | PAID | PAID |
| License | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Deployment | Cloud | Cloud |
| Platforms | Web | Web |
| Model support | Multi-model | Multi-model |
| Vendor (differs) | Harvey AI | Luminance |
| Capabilities (differs) |
|
|
The honest brief
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
Luminance
Autopilot redlining against your playbook across 14+ languages — built for high-volume inbound review, not drafting.
- Fast autopilot redlining
- Cross-border, multilingual review
- Pattern-detection risk heatmaps
- Purpose-built legal models
- Built for transactional, not litigation
- Weaker at net-new drafting
- Enterprise sales and deployment
- Opaque per-seat pricing
When to pick which
Both cover Contract review and Contract drafting.
Pick Harvey if you need Chat with documents and Legal research.
- Chat with documents (secondary capability)
- Legal research (primary capability)
Pick Luminance if you need Contract lifecycle (CLM) and Regulatory compliance.
- Contract lifecycle (CLM) (primary capability)
- Regulatory compliance (secondary capability)
Luminance leans on Contract review as a headline capability; Harvey treats it as secondary.
- Contract review (primary capability)