Adira vs Agiloft: An Honest Comparison (2026)

Searching "Adira vs Agiloft" usually means one of two things: you already have Agiloft shortlisted and want a sanity check on what it does not cover, or you are a smaller, India-first legal team wondering whether you need a platform built for that much configuration at all. This page is published by Adira, a CLM platform that competes with Agiloft for part of this market, disclosed upfront. What follows is written to be fair to Agiloft regardless: it has been named a Leader in Gartner's Magic Quadrant for Contract Life Cycle Management for six years running and in the 2025 Forrester Wave for CLM, serves more than 900 enterprise customers, and its no-code configuration engine is a genuine, earned strength that most CLM vendors, Adira included, do not currently try to match. "Which is better" depends on the job you are hiring the tool for and how much in-house configuration capacity you actually have to spend building it.

What Agiloft actually is

Agiloft was founded in 1991 in Redwood City, California, originally as Integral Solutions Corporation, by Colin Earl, and spent decades building a deep, configurable platform quietly before the CLM category became fashionable. In May 2024, a fund managed by private equity firm KKR agreed to acquire a majority stake in Agiloft, a deal that closed on 12 July 2024, with existing investor FTV Capital adding to its position and JMI Equity joining as a new investor. In January 2025, Agiloft acquired Screens, an AI-powered contract review and redlining tool. On 21 April 2026 it launched Agiloft Astra, a contracts AI platform for legal, procurement, sales, and finance teams, with a free tier anyone can start using without a procurement process; Astra reached general availability on 14 July 2026. Every Astra account, regardless of tier, operates under what Agiloft calls its Clean Data Promise: customer contract data is never used to train AI models.

The core platform's real differentiator has always been its no-code architecture: legal ops or IT can build and change custom data models, approval workflows, and business rules across contract types and departments without a developer, and an embedded integration hub (iPaaS) connects to more than 1,000 enterprise applications, with named integrations into Salesforce, NetSuite, SAP, and Microsoft tooling. Agiloft states partnerships with both OpenAI and Anthropic power different parts of its AI feature set. As of writing, Agiloft's G2 profile shows a strong rating around 4.6 out of 5, and G2's own average-implementation-time data puts a typical rollout around five months, the cost of the same configuration depth that makes the platform powerful.

What Adira actually is

Adira is a browser-based, end-to-end contract lifecycle platform, not an add-on layered onto an existing enterprise stack. Drafting, review, e-signing, e-stamping, a searchable repository, and obligation tracking sit inside one product, built on Anthropic's Claude, published by Clausio LLP at adiralaw.com. Its drafting differentiator is Company Persona: it grounds output in your own executed contracts, playbook positions, and a structured, editable clause tree, detailed in what a company legal persona is. Adira publishes pricing rather than selling by quote: Practice runs $89 to $109 per seat per month, Firm runs $179 to $219, Enterprise is custom, each with a 7-day trial, last verified 4 September 2026 on adiralaw.com. It states it does not train models on customer contracts and claims coverage across 40-plus jurisdictions, India deepest. It is also a much newer company than Agiloft, with no equivalent no-code configuration layer and a far smaller, shorter track record; that gap is real and worth saying plainly before anything else in this comparison.

Drafting, review, and configurability: two different strengths

Agiloft's real advantage, and the one this comparison should not soften, is that a legal ops or admin team can reshape the platform itself: new contract types, new approval chains that branch by business unit or deal size, new fields and business rules, all without waiting on engineering. That matters most for an organisation running many different contract types through different departments with genuinely different rules for each, procurement paper needing a different sign-off chain than a sales MSA, for example. Layered on that, Screens and now Astra add AI-assisted review, risk flagging, and redlining to the same configurable base.

Adira does not offer general-purpose, no-code data-model building, and does not claim to. Its strength sits one level down, at the clause and drafting level: Company Persona grounds a first-pass draft in your own executed contracts and stated playbook positions, and the structured clause tree lets a reviewer work clause by clause against those positions rather than against a flat block of AI text, explained further in structured clause tree versus flat text. If the actual pain is "our workflow logic is a mess of exceptions across departments," Agiloft's configurability is the more direct fix. If the pain is "our drafts do not sound like our own lawyers wrote them," that is closer to what Company Persona is built for. Neither vendor's output has been independently benchmarked by a third party on Indian-law contracts specifically; test both on a real document before trusting either.

E-signature and India execution: the statutes a configurable platform can still miss

An electronic signature is legally recognised in India under Section 5 of the Information Technology Act, 2000: "Where any law provides that information or any other matter shall be authenticated by affixing the signature or any document shall be signed or bear the signature of any person, then, notwithstanding anything contained in such law, such requirement shall be deemed to have been satisfied, if such information or matter is authenticated by means of electronic signature affixed in such manner as may be prescribed." Read Section 5 on Indian Kanoon. That covers signing, not stamping, and the two are not the same step. Section 35 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 states: "No instrument chargeable with duty shall be admitted in evidence for any purpose by any person having by law or consent of parties authority to receive evidence, or shall be acted upon, registered or authenticated by any such person or by any public officer, unless such instrument is duly stamped." Read Section 35 on Indian Kanoon. An e-signed contract that was never stamped, or was stamped short, can be unusable as evidence in an Indian court however well the signature capture worked. Since 1 July 2024, electronic records are also governed by Section 63 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, replacing the old Section 65B of the Evidence Act, requiring a two-part certificate, the device custodian and a technical expert, plus the record's hash value, before a copy is admitted without the original device.

None of this is a knock on Agiloft's no-code depth; a platform built primarily for US and European workflow has less structural reason to build Indian stamp-duty logic into its engine, since its home market has no equivalent requirement, though a customer could in theory configure a stamping step themselves given how deep the workflow builder goes. Adira, positioned India-first, treats e-stamping as a built-in part of the execution flow rather than something a customer has to configure. Ask any vendor, including Agiloft, to show exactly how a document goes from e-signed to stamped to court-admissible for an Indian counterparty.

Data handling and AI training: two competing promises, worth reading closely

India's Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 (Act No. 22 of 2023) governs how any platform processing personal data of Indian data principals must handle it, and the Digital Personal Data Protection Rules, 2025, notified 14 November 2025, started an 18-month phased compliance window for most obligations. Read the DPDP Act on India Code. The constitutional root of the underlying obligation is Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd) v Union of India, (2017) 10 SCC 1, where a nine-judge Supreme Court bench unanimously held privacy a fundamental right under Article 21. Read the judgment on Indian Kanoon.

Separate from statute, this is worth stating honestly because it has changed recently: Adira's "we do not train models on customer contracts" has been one of its clearer marketed differentiators, but Agiloft's Astra Clean Data Promise now makes a materially similar commitment, that customer contract data inside Astra is never used to train AI models, on every account tier, free included. That closes a gap that existed even a year earlier. Whether that promise extends identically across Agiloft's broader CLM platform outside Astra, or only to the newer AI layer, is not confirmed by public information; ask directly and get it in writing rather than assuming parity. Neither company's data-hosting location for Indian customers, or current SOC 2 and ISO certification status, is independently verified here; ask both, and get the answer in the order form, not a sales call.

Integrations: Agiloft's genuine enterprise advantage

Be honest about this one too: if your contracting already runs through Salesforce, NetSuite, SAP, or a Microsoft-centric stack, Agiloft's embedded iPaaS, reportedly connecting to more than 1,000 enterprise applications with named, packaged recipes for the biggest ones, is a real advantage Adira does not currently match. Adira is a standalone web application without equivalent packaged integration depth today. A team with significant workflow logic already living inside a CRM or ERP, wanting contracts to plug into that rather than sit beside it, should weigh this heavily.

Pricing and implementation

Agiloft does not publish a rate card. Its plans run Essentials, Advanced, and Premium, quote-based, with reported annual costs from roughly $6,000 at the low end to more than $60,000 depending on users, features, and integrations; a purchase-data tracker (Vendr) puts average buyer spend around $68,121 a year, and third-party estimates put per-user pricing around $65 to $150 a month. See Agiloft pricing estimates and typical hidden costs (Hyperstart). The same source lists commonly reported add-ons worth budgeting for separately: implementation fees from $5,000 to $75,000 depending on complexity, premium support around 20 to 30 percent of the annual licence fee, sandbox environments at $750 to $1,500 a month each, and per-gigabyte migration charges. G2's implementation-time data puts a typical Agiloft rollout around five months, the cost of the same depth that makes the platform powerful, not a flaw in the product.

Adira's pricing is public: Practice $89 to $109 per seat per month, Firm $179 to $219, Enterprise on request, each with a 7-day trial, last verified 4 September 2026 on adiralaw.com. It is usable inside that trial with no mandatory implementation project, suiting a team that wants to be live in days rather than months, at the cost of not getting a bespoke, department-by-department workflow build in return.

Side-by-side: the full comparison matrix

Job	Agiloft	Adira
Drafting	AI-assisted via Screens/Astra, on a fully configurable base	Company Persona grounds drafts in your own contracts, playbook, clause tree
Review and redline	AI review and redlining (Screens, Jan 2025; Astra, GA Jul 2026)	Clause-level review against your clause tree and stated positions
Configurability	No-code data model, workflows, approval logic across departments; genuine strength	No general-purpose no-code layer; strength sits at clause and drafting level
Repository	Deep, customer-configured data model	Standalone, searchable, structured clause tree
Obligations and renewals	Tracked, configurable to custom fields and rules	Tracked within the standalone platform
E-sign and India execution	Signature capture standard; India stamping not a publicised feature	E-sign plus e-stamping built into the execution flow
Integrations	Embedded iPaaS, 1,000-plus apps reported, named Salesforce/NetSuite/SAP recipes	Standalone; no equivalent packaged depth today
Data handling and AI training	Astra Clean Data Promise: no training, all tiers, since Jul 2026 GA; scope outside Astra unconfirmed	States no training of models on customer contracts; confirm current certifications
Pricing	Not published; quote-based; reported $6,000-$60,000-plus/yr, avg ~$68,121/yr (Vendr), plus hidden costs	Published: Practice $89-$109, Firm $179-$219, Enterprise custom, per seat/month
Implementation	Around five months (G2 average) for a configured rollout	Usable inside a 7-day trial; no mandatory implementation project
Scale and track record	Founded 1991, KKR majority owner since Jul 2024, 900-plus customers, 6-year Gartner MQ Leader, 2025 Forrester Wave Leader	Newer entrant, smaller published base, shorter track record

Signs you're buying the wrong size of tool

Normal	Red flag	Why it matters
Realistic implementation range given up front, tied to how much you plan to configure	"Live in weeks" promised for a deeply custom, multi-department build	A five-month average is what real configuration costs; a rushed promise usually means scope got cut
Pricing scoped clearly against your user count and feature list on the first call	"Contact sales" with no ballpark, or a quote that grows after each demo	Reported hidden costs (implementation, support, sandboxes, migration) can rival the base licence fee
Vendor explains, specifically, how an e-signed document gets stamped for India	Signature and stamping treated as the same step, or left for you to configure	Under Section 35 of the Indian Stamp Act, an unstamped instrument can be inadmissible as evidence
"No training on your data" stated in the order form, with the exact scope named	The same promise made only in marketing copy, not a contractual clause	A marketing page is not enforceable; only the signed terms are
Configuration ownership and cost after go-live spelled out, in writing	Every future workflow change routed back through paid professional services	Flexibility is only as useful as your ability to use it after the initial build

A bad AI-training clause, and a better one

Both vendors in this comparison now market some version of "we do not train on your data." That makes the actual contract language worth checking, because a marketing promise and an enforceable clause are not the same thing.

Bad (permissive, easy to rely on the wrong way): "Vendor may use Customer Data, including contract content, to develop, train, and improve Vendor's products and services, including artificial intelligence and machine learning models."

What is wrong: "may use" is a standing permission, not a promise not to; "develop, train, and improve" covers almost anything the vendor wants to do with your contracts, and nothing here is time-bound once training has happened.

Better (a real prohibition, not a marketing line): "Vendor shall not use Customer Data, including contract content or metadata, to train, fine-tune, or otherwise improve any artificial intelligence or machine learning model, whether for Vendor's own use or for any third party, and shall process Customer Data solely to provide the Services and as required by applicable law."

What changed and why: "may use" became "shall not," closing the permission rather than declining to exercise it; "fine-tune" was added because a vendor can avoid "training" a model from scratch while still fine-tuning one on your data, a gap plain "training" language leaves open; and data use is now scoped narrowly to service delivery, not left open to whatever the vendor later calls "improvement." Draft or mark up a clause like this yourself, free, in Weave, Adira's browser-based contract tool, before it goes near a signature, whichever vendor you end up with.

Which to pick, by buyer profile

Agiloft fits you if you have genuinely complex, department-specific contracting workflows, in-house capacity (legal ops, IT, or both) to build and maintain a no-code configuration, existing investment in Salesforce, NetSuite, SAP, or Microsoft you want contracts wired into directly, and patience for a rollout averaging around five months. Its six straight years as a Gartner MQ Leader and its 2025 Forrester Wave Leader placement are earned, not marketing claims.

Adira fits you if most of your contracts sit under Indian law, you want published pricing before a sales call, your team lacks spare capacity to build and maintain a bespoke no-code workflow, and you want drafting grounded in your own house style through Company Persona and a clause tree from day one rather than a platform you configure into that shape yourself.

Whichever way you lean, do not stop at either vendor's own comparison page. Queries like "best CLM" or "Agiloft alternatives" are better answered by third-party review sites like G2 and Capterra, where real customers rate their actual experience, than by any vendor's page, this one included. For a wider alternative set, see Agiloft alternatives, and for a broader market view, see best contract management software 2026.

FAQ

Is Adira a direct Agiloft competitor? Only partially. Agiloft is built for organisations wanting to configure a CLM deeply to their own workflow across departments, with a no-code engine and heavy integration depth; Adira is standalone and India-first, built for strong drafting and execution out of the box without a configuration project. They overlap on the core CLM job but win different buyers.

Has Agiloft been acquired? Yes. A fund managed by KKR agreed in May 2024 to acquire a majority stake in Agiloft, a deal that closed on 12 July 2024, with FTV Capital and JMI Equity also involved as investors. Agiloft has not been renamed.

Which is cheaper, Adira or Agiloft? For most small and mid-sized teams, Adira, since its pricing is published and starts at $89 to $109 per seat per month. Agiloft does not publish rates; third-party purchase data puts average annual spend around $68,000, with reported implementation, support, and migration costs on top.

Does Agiloft handle Indian stamp duty and e-stamping? Agiloft's public materials do not foreground India-specific stamp duty or e-stamping; its no-code engine could in principle be configured for it, but that is not a stated out-of-the-box feature. Ask its sales team directly how a signed document becomes a duly stamped, court-admissible instrument under the Indian Stamp Act.

Does Agiloft train its AI on customer contracts? Under its Astra Clean Data Promise, GA since July 2026, Agiloft states customer data in Astra is never used to train AI models, across all tiers including the free one. Whether that extends identically to Agiloft's broader CLM platform outside Astra is not confirmed publicly; ask directly and get it written into the order form.

Can I try either tool before committing? Adira offers a 7-day trial, and you can test a real clause free in Weave without creating an account. Agiloft's Astra layer has a free tier anyone can start using directly; the core configurable CLM platform does not publish a self-serve trial, and expect a guided demo instead.

This page compares Agiloft and Adira on public information as of September 2026, disclosed as written by Adira, a competing product. Vendor pricing, ownership, and product scope change, so confirm current details directly with each company, and current review sentiment on G2 or Capterra, before buying. Nothing here is legal advice on whether a specific contract, clause, or execution process is valid or admissible in your situation; it states the general statutory position, not your specific facts, and a qualified Indian lawyer should review anything you are about to sign.