Pricing and capability claims verified through .
CoCounsel vs Harvey
Choose CoCounsel when Thomson Reuters research workflows matter. Choose Harvey when firm drafting and review throughput is the primary bottleneck.
Moneda may earn a commission from some product links. Partner economics do not affect our recommendations. This page is research-based — conclusions come from product evidence and documentation, not a claim that we personally purchased every product listed.
Winner for most teams
Harvey
Choose Harvey when drafting and firm-ready legal AI workflows are the bottleneck. Choose CoCounsel when Thomson Reuters research ecosystem fit is non-negotiable.
Try HarveyBest alternative
CoCounsel
Firms that want legal AI tied to Thomson Reuters research workflows
Try CoCounselHow we evaluated this
Evaluation note: We assessed Drafting assistance, Research workflow fit, Firm deployment considerations against vendor docs, product pages, and workflow fit — not synthetic benchmark scores. 5 primary sources checked. Harvey led for most teams in our editorial call.
Which of these are you?
Your pick
Harvey
Legal drafting and review workflows for firm deployment.
Tradeoff
CoCounsel can be better when the task is mostly thomson reuters-native research teams.
Highlighted = better for Firms prioritizing drafting throughput
Spec at a glance
Online plans for new customers at law firms of 1 to 10 attorneys. Larger firms are told to call 888-728-7677 option 2. The public page does not show a dollar amount until the configurator is filled in - Checked 2026-10-10: https://sales.legalsolutions.thomsonreuters.com/en-us/products/cocounsel-legal/700/plans-pricing
No list price on the Harvey site. The /pricing path returned 404 - Checked 2026-10-10: https://www.harvey.ai/
✅ Included · ❌ Missing · ⚠️ Partial or add-on. Shaded cell = stronger option for your segment.
Don't pick CoCounsel if
Your work is mostly firms prioritizing drafting throughput — Harvey wins that workflow.
Don't pick Harvey if
Your work is mostly thomson reuters-native research teams — CoCounsel wins that workflow.
What we evaluated
Evaluation criteria: Drafting assistance, Research workflow fit, Firm deployment considerations. Conclusions are based on primary documentation, product evidence, and workflow fit — not hands-on benchmark runs unless noted. 5 primary sources checked.
Harvey is the default for drafting and firm workflows. CoCounsel is the alternate when Thomson Reuters research continuity drives the buy.
See also Harvey vs Lexis+ with Protégé for research-ecosystem alternatives, and Spellbook vs Harvey when the job is Word contracts.
What you can actually price today
Checked 10 October 2026. None of these buttons is an affiliate link.
CoCounsel Legal. Thomson Reuters publishes an online configurator for new customers. On the plans page, law-firm plans are described as available for firms of 1 to 10 attorneys. Larger firms are told to call 888-728-7677 and select option 2. The FAQ says online prices are for new customers only, and that 1-year, 2-year, and 3-year terms exist. The public HTML does not include a dollar amount until sector, attorney count, jurisdiction, and term are submitted. A third-party write-up reported $784 per attorney per month on a 1-year plan. That figure was not on Thomson Reuters’ public page in this check, so this page does not publish it as the price. Source: CoCounsel Legal plans and pricing.
Harvey. harvey.ai does not list a price. https://www.harvey.ai/pricing returned 404. Third-party roundups disagree with each other, and Harvey does not confirm them, so this page does not print a Harvey dollar range.
Spellbook is not on this head-to-head. Its own pricing page is quote-only. See Spellbook vs Harvey.
What we evaluated: drafting, research fit, and deployment. Harvey won for drafting. CoCounsel won for TR-native research.
This call changes if the alternate matches the winner on your primary criteria without switching pain. Until then, follow the verdict above.