Juro vs Summize

Need an all-in-one contract management solution?

Summize is a contract tool that seeks to streamline contract requests by integrating with Slack and Microsoft Teams. This means that commercial teams can self-serve on contract creation by completing simple Q&A forms, like in Juro. 

However, unlike Juro, Summize doesn’t offer the native, end-to-end functionality that legal and business teams need to streamline the entire contract lifecycle. Instead, Summize users will need to jump back and forth between several different tools to draft, negotiate, approve, sign, and store contracts.  

This is distinct from Juro which enables teams to agree and manage contracts end-to-end in one collaborative workspace. As a result, businesses that use Juro can agree contracts up to 10x faster than with traditional tools. 

Let’s compare Juro vs Summize in more detail now.

Summize limitations

1. Lacks features for pre-signature contract management

Whilst Summize does offer a simple and streamlined way for teams to request contracts, it doesn't offer many of the useful features legal and business teams need to create, approve and negotiate these.

In particular, Summize doesn't have a native contract editor or automated approval workflows. Users can't redline the contracts within the tool either. These edits and revisions have to happen in Microsoft Word instead.

This is distinct from Juro where users can agree contracts end-to-end without leaving their browser.

Juro users can add internal comments to collaborate with their colleagues, or external comments and redlines to negotiate with counterparties. This real-time, browser-based collaboration empowers teams to agree contracts faster and more efficiently.

2. No native eSigning solution

Unlike many CLM solutions, Summize doesn't offer native eSigning functionality. This means that you'll need to sign contracts in, and pay separately for, a solution like DocuSign or AdobeSign.

This can quickly become expensive for businesses with large contract volumes as many eSignature tools charge for 'envelopes', which you'll need to pay for in addition to Summize.

By contrast, Juro offers native eSigning functionality, empowering legal and business teams to sign contracts in the same workspace they use to create, review, negotiate, approve and store them.

Juro's legally binding eSigning solution is also included across all plans, with no limit on the number of documents you can send for signing.

3. Time-consuming to implement 

Independent reviews left by Summize users suggest that the platform is cumbersome and time-consuming to implement. This usually means users wait longer to receive value from the tool.

“The build process for identifying clauses, contracts and playbooks etc is time consuming and difficult” - Verified Summize user, G2 review

Other independent reviews support this, saying that Summize “took a little while to get to grips with”, and that “lengthy initial set-up time was required”. 

This is distinct from Juro which currently leads the contract management category for fastest implementation and is rated above the industry average for ease of use, quality of support and ease of setup on G2.

This makes Juro a better fit for businesses that can't afford to invest a lot of time and resource into getting a platform set up.

Summize pricing

Summize share limited information about their pricing plans on their website. However, they do mention that quotes will be based on users, support needs, and feature requirements. This means that plans can quickly become expensive if you want access to more features or want to adopt the tool across teams.

Juro pricing

Unlike Summize, Juro offers unlimited users across all plans, encouraging adoption across different teams.

Juro's plans also offer end-to-end contract management functionality as standard, with all plans providing access to a rich-text contract editor, advanced eSignatures, renewal reminders, bulk actions, dashboards and more.

This makes Juro an affordable solution for businesses that want to adopt the platform across different teams and streamline the entire contract lifecycle.

Want to find out more about Juro's flexible plans? Check out our pricing page.

Summize reviews

Summize have fewer reviews across independent review sites than Juro, with no reviews on Capterra or SoftwareAdvice yet.

Summize do have several reviews on G2, with most of these focused on Summize's contract review functionality in particular.

Juro reviews

Juro is rated 4.8 out of 5 on G2, making it one of the top-rated CLM solutions on the market. These reviews typically praise the platform's end-to-end functionality, industry leading customer support, and business-wide adoption.

"Juro is the first CLM i've encountered that has truly been adopted (and enjoyed) by various company departments and stakeholders" - Verified Juro user, G2 review

"What we've rolled out with Juro in terms of contract creation, negotiation, execution...is amongst the best we've seen in any industry!" - Verified Juro user, G2 review

Juro vs Summize: which is best for you?

Juro and Summize are both great options for legal teams that want to manage contracts more efficiently. However, Summize lacks many of the features needed to drive efficiency pre-signature, making Juro a better option for contract management overall.

Juro's AI-enabled contract automation platform empowers scaling businesses to create, agree, execute and manage contracts up to 10x faster than traditional tools.

To find out more about how Juro can drive shorter time to revenue and reduced costs for your business, hit the button below.