Skip to content
Monday, 2 November 2026Vol. III · Legal practice software, scored against a published rubricThe Monday Brief →
Rubrilyn

Legal practice software, scored against a published rubric

How We Score

Updated

Rubrilyn publishes researched comparisons. This page explains the criteria we use, how the weights differ by category, what evidence we rely on, and what "Researched comparison" means.

What "Researched comparison" means

We do not run our own product tests. For each product we review the vendor's documentation, pricing pages and changelogs, and we read public reviews and published benchmarks. We compare what the vendor states the product does, what it charges, and what its stated limits are. Every article is labelled "Researched comparison" so the basis of the ranking is clear.

We do not publish numeric product scores on researched pages. Rankings are ordinal (first, second, third) and each "best for" label is tied to a stated buyer need, not to a score out of ten.

Law practice management

Criteria and weights, summing to 100:

  • Matter and case management depth: 25
  • Time tracking, billing and trust accounting: 20
  • Calendars, deadlines and docketing: 15
  • Client portal and communication: 15
  • Integrations and data migration: 10
  • Pricing transparency and published plans: 10
  • Security, access controls and audit history: 5

Contract management and e-signature

Criteria and weights, summing to 100:

  • Template library and drafting tools: 20
  • Approval workflows and routing: 20
  • E-signature, including legal validity and audit trail: 20
  • Repository, search and obligation tracking: 15
  • Renewal and deadline alerts: 10
  • Integrations (CRM, storage, single sign-on): 10
  • Pricing transparency and published plans: 5

Criteria and weights, summing to 100:

  • Enquiry capture (forms, chat, phone, e-sign): 20
  • Screening, qualification and routing: 20
  • Conflict checking: 20
  • Follow-up automation (drip campaigns, reminders): 15
  • Deadline and statute capture: 10
  • Reporting and pipeline visibility: 10
  • Pricing transparency and published plans: 5

Evidence sources

For every product we check, in order of preference: the vendor's pricing page, the vendor's feature and documentation pages, the vendor's changelog or release notes, public user reviews, and published third-party benchmarks. Every price in an article is linked to the vendor's own pricing page with the date we checked it. Where a vendor publishes no price, we write "Quote only" and link the vendor's pricing or contact page.

Limits of our method

A researched comparison can verify what a vendor claims and charges, but it cannot verify how a product performs under a firm's real workload. Demos, trials and reference customers remain the buyer's job, and our articles say so. We never present research as testing.