Harvey vs Supio
A side-by-side comparison of Harvey and Supio, two Legal tools, drawn from Ignaite's continuously-verified listings.
Compared from listings verified as of
Supio
LegalAgentic AI for plaintiff law — intake, medical chronologies, demands, and litigation.
View SupioAt a glance
| Attribute | Harvey | Supio |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Legal | Legal |
| Pricing | PAID | PAID |
| License | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Deployment | Cloud | Cloud |
| Platforms | Web | Web |
| Model support (differs) | Multi-model | — |
| Vendor (differs) | Harvey AI | Supio |
| 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
Supio
Purpose-built for plaintiff PI and mass-tort work, automating medical chronologies and demand letters general legal AI tools don't specialize in.
- Specialized for plaintiff PI/mass tort
- Turns document sets into case files
- Drafts demand letters and litigation docs
- $91M raised; ARR quadrupled post-Series A
- Narrow focus on plaintiff-side firms
- No public pricing; demo-led
- US-focused
When to pick which
Pick Harvey if you need Chat with documents, Legal research, Contract review, and Contract drafting.
- Chat with documents (secondary capability)
- Legal research (primary capability)
- Contract review (secondary capability)
- Contract drafting (secondary capability)
Pick Supio if you need Document parsing (structured), Demand letters, and Case management.
- Document parsing (structured) (secondary capability)
- Demand letters (primary capability)
- Case management (primary capability)