Reveal

What to ask before you buy

1. What does the AI review actually do, and how is its output validated?
2. What security documentation is available, and under what terms?
3. Where is my matter data hosted?
4. What is the pricing model, and does it scale with data volume?

Limits in the record

• No public price was located, so the product cannot be evaluated without a sales conversation.
• The checked pages describe a trust center but do not publish a quotable confidentiality or training statement.
• The platform is aimed at litigation teams with substantial document volumes.

How it sits in Document management & e-discovery

Within e-discovery, this competes with Everlaw, Relativity aiR, and Casepoint on review capability. Its positioning in the record is the AI review layer plus a security trust center.

Reading the vendor’s wording

The vendor publishes a trust center and invites requests for security documentation. That is a controlled disclosure model rather than a public statement, so the record cannot quote a confidentiality or training commitment. A firm should request the documentation and read it before committing.

How to evaluate it in a trial

1. Request the security documentation and read it before evaluating features.
2. Test the AI review against a document set where you already know the correct coding.
3. Ask how the platform validates AI review output and what the reviewer still has to check.
4. Confirm the export format for productions and coding decisions.

What adopting it costs

The switching cost is high, because reviewed documents, coding decisions, and work product live in the platform. A firm leaving has to export productions and preserve the review record.

Closest alternative

Everlaw — The closest alternative. Both are AI-assisted review platforms for litigation teams; Everlaw publishes a quotable security statement that this one gates behind a request.