Harvey vs Spellbook
Both Harvey and Spellbook target similar UK teams. This side-by-side compares pricing, best-for use cases and our rating so you can pick without a 30-minute demo call.
Harvey
8.8/10Paid (firm-level licensing, contact sales)
The GPT-4-class assistant purpose-built for BigLaw research, drafting and due diligence.
Best for
Large law firms and top-tier in-house teams with real matter volume.
Not for
Solo practitioners — pricing and deployment are firm-scale.
Spellbook
8.5/10Paid (per-seat, from ~$150/user/mo)
Suggests clauses, spots missing provisions and redlines contracts without leaving Microsoft Word.
Best for
Transactional lawyers and in-house teams living inside Word.
Not for
Litigators or teams standardised on Google Docs.
Our verdict
On raw scores, Harvey edges it (8.8/10 vs 8.5/10). Pick Harvey for large law firms and top-tier in-house teams with real matter volume.; pick Spellbook if you specifically need transactional lawyers and in-house teams living inside word..
Harvey — pros
- +State-of-the-art quality on legal drafting and reasoning tasks.
- +Matter-scoped data isolation and enterprise controls.
- +Deep design partnerships with firms like A&O and PwC Legal.
- +Rapid roadmap — new practice-area workflows every quarter.
Harvey — cons
- −Opaque pricing; expect a serious commitment.
- −Requires a change-management programme to land at partner level.
- −Not a drop-in for individual lawyers.
Spellbook — pros
- +No new UI to learn — sits inside Word.
- +Playbook-aware suggestions that respect firm style.
- +Fast NDA and commercial contract turnaround.
- +Solid confidentiality posture with no training on your docs.
Spellbook — cons
- −Microsoft Word only.
- −Suggestions still need a lawyer's judgment — trust but verify.
- −Per-seat cost adds up for larger teams.