Juro vs PandaDoc

Does PandaDoc work for legal?

PandaDoc is an effective sales tool for getting proposals and quotes into the hands of customers. But does it have the advanced contract functionality that legal teams need to negotiate legal documents?

This page explores the features, limitations and pricing of PandaDoc's document management system compared to Juro’s AI contract collaboration platform.

Pandadoc limitations

PandaDoc is much loved by sales teams as it enables them to tackle routine sales agreements and proposals with less routine admin work required.

However, PandaDoc's capabilities are limited when it comes to supporting other teams in the business with contract management, particularly legal teams. We'll discuss why now.

1. Limited redlining capabilities for lawyers

The most significant limitation of PandaDoc is that it doesn't offer the features required to redline contracts natively. Instead, PandaDoc users need to take documents out of the platform and move them into Microsoft Word to redline them.

This means creating new versions of a document, jumping between tools and redlining them in the editor - all of which creates friction for the parties involved and restricts collaboration. It also means that valuable contract metadata isn't captured, causing you to miss out on critical insights and intelligence.

This is distinct from the way that contracts are redlined and negotiated in Juro. Juro's collaborative contract management platform enables teams to edit, comment on, redline and track contracts in one workspace, in real time. This streamlines collaboration, enabling teams to capture revenue faster and more efficiently.

2. Awkward and rigid formatting

PandaDoc users also experience some difficulty when formatting contracts, especially when they import and export files into the platform.

This is because styling and formatting can become lost or compromised during this process, making the contracts look less professional as a result. This can also ruin the experience for candidates and prospects you're seeking to work with.

Creating templates was not easy at all. It wasn't intuitive and I spent a lot of time correcting mistakes that I had made - Verified PandaDoc user, G2

Unlike PandaDoc, Juro has a rich-text editor designed specifically for contract creation, with flexible templates and workflows to deliver a seamless experience for internal teams and counterparties.

Not only can Juro users customize contracts with rich media and seamless formatting, but they can also customize workflows by adding rules in a contract template to determine who can change what, and when. This flexibility is essential for growing businesses that want teams to self-serve on contracts confidently.

3. Lightweight reporting capabilities

It's also fair to say that PandaDoc's post-signature contract management features aren't as advanced as the ones in a data-rich platform like Juro.

While PandaDoc does offer contract analytics to provide insights into the number of contracts created, sent and completed, PandaDoc doesn't offer the same level of visibility into contract's contents as a platform like Juro does. This isn't surprising given that redlined contracts re-enter the platform as static DOCX files.

Reporting could be better and more detailed - Verified Pandadoc user, G2 review

There is additional functionality we'd like to see around reporting (e.g. average time to approve contracts, number of times contracts are resubmitted for approval) - Verified Pandadoc user, G2 review

Juro users, by contrast, can run real-time, dynamic reports into contracts, set automated key date reminders and create customizable contract dashboards to query contracts based on the terms and values within them.

Let's discuss how Juro's features compare in a bit more detail now.

Juro benefits

Powerful legal AI

Juro's legal AI Assistant enables users to automate contract drafting. Contract owners can prompt the AI to draft full contracts or individual clauses in seconds, based on the information provided in their contract playbook and guardrails.

Juro's Legal AI Assistant can also be used to automate the contract review and analysis process. This can be used to identify risks, summarize key clauses, and detect deviations from standard accepted terms.

Streamlined contract collaboration

Juro's collaborative contract management platform enables legal and commercial teams to work together on contracts in real time. They can add comments, redlines and suggestions to contracts - all without leaving the tool.

This means that teams can manage their entire contract process, from initiating contracts to reviewing, negotiating, approving, signing, and storing them, all without the need to switch between multiple tools.

This streamlined process minimizes friction for parties, resulting in faster and more efficient contract processing.

Flexible contract editing and workflows

Juro's browser-native contract editor offers flexible templates and customizable workflows, making it easy to keep control of contracts while also enabling commercial teams to create and send contracts without involving the legal team.

Juro users can set rules around who can change what in a contract and which changes will trigger the need for approval. They can also customize approval and signing workflows to ensure contracts reach the right person at the right time. This makes it a great alternative to PandaDoc for teams that need to automate routine admin safely.

Unrivalled visibility into contracts

Contracts in Juro are created as structured data, giving users discoverable, actionable insights into their contract data.

Juro users can query contracts in seconds, run real-time, dynamic reports into their contracts, and even track upcoming contract deadlines with automated contract reminders.

This gives stakeholders instant access to contracts and their data, providing contract visibility right across your organization.

PandaDoc pricing

PandaDoc has an affordable entry price but can quickly become expensive for scaling businesses that require a lot of seats. This is because PandaDoc charges per seat, rather than offering unlimited users and workflows like Juro.

This makes Juro a better and more flexible option for growing businesses and mid-market teams, because the price doesn't scale with the number of seats you require.

Head over to our pricing page to select a plan that's right for your business.

PandaDoc reviews

Read independent Pandadoc reviews

PandaDoc is rated 4.7 out of 5 on G2 but has a lower score of 4.5 out of 5 on Capterra. Juro is rated higher on G2, with an overall score of 4.8 out of 5. In fact, Juro outperforms PandaDoc across every criteria on Capterra, particularly when it comes to ease of use and quality of support. That's why Juro is rated as a 'Leader' in CLM, while PandaDoc isn't even rated in the category.

Here are some reviews left by verified PandaDoc users on G2 and Capterra:

Creating templates was not easy at all. It wasn't intuitive and I spent a lot of time correcting mistakes that I had made

Once they identify you as a small business they no longer care about you or how you are doing with the software

Read independent Juro reviews

According to the scores in Capterra, Juro's AI contract management software is one of the highest rated tools in the market, making it a great option for businesses like yours.

Below are some reviews left by Juro users:

Juro is the first CLM I've encountered that has truly been adopted (and enjoyed) by various company stakeholders. It's easy to navigate and feels very familiar - no fuss in terms of training colleagues to utilise the tool - Verified Juro user, G2 review

We set out to find a tool that checked both our legal and GTM team's requirements. After fairly extensive market research, we found Juro checked all the boxes - Verified Juro user, G2 review

The Juro platform has saved my team 90% of the time we used to spend writing and sharing contracts - Verified Juro user, G2 reviews

To find out more about how Juro compares to PandaDoc, fill in the form below to book a personalized demo with a specialist.