Menu
This weekThreadsBy practiceToolsArenaSignalsMethodMoversCompareBest by categoryBy yearFeature requestsBy modelEvolutionRatingsThe tableCorrectionsFor vendors
Updated

Home › Compare › Harvey vs Copilot

Harvey vs Copilot: what lawyers say.

Short answer. Harvey has net sentiment −21 on 749 public lawyer voices and Copilot has +5 on 155, as of . Copilot is ahead on this record: the two 90% bands do not overlap. Net is like minus dislike as a share of voices.

Harvey

−21

net · band −26 to −15

749 voices High

vs
Copilot

+5

net · band −7 to +16

155 voices Medium

Copilot ahead on this record: the two 90% bands do not overlap.

749 voices on Harvey and 155 on Copilot, all public posts by lawyers and people who work with them, since 2023. This is how they describe using each tool, not a test of the tools. Harvey is a legal AI assistant by Harvey AI; Copilot is a general-purpose model by Microsoft.

Side by side

Rates and bands, not raw totals.

HarveyCopilot
Voices on record749155
Like · mixed · dislike204 · 101 · 35961 · 24 · 54
Net like minus dislike, % of voices−21 90% band −26 to −15+5 90% band −7 to +16
ConfidenceHighMedium
Per 100 voices: like · dislike · name hallucinations27 · 48 · 539 · 35 · 7
Latest voice

Copilot has the higher net (+5 against −21) and the two 90% bands do not overlap. That describes who posts and how they feel, not which product is better. Difference in net: −26 points (Harvey minus Copilot).

By task

What they were doing when they posted.

TaskHarveyCopilot
Legal research56 voices · net −1110 voices · net −30
Drafting59 voices · net +2030 voices · net +17
Contract review43 voices · net +129 voices · net +22
Citation checking6 voices · net −672 voices, too few for a net
Discovery10 voices · net +202 voices, too few for a net
Summarization19 voices · net +1119 voices · net +11
General use545 voices · net −3078 voices · net 0

Net here is plain like minus dislike as a share of that task’s voices, with no band: a task needs 5+ voices on a side to show one. Tasks with fewer on both sides are left out. A voice has one task, set by our classifier.

What they complain about and value

Harvey · complaints

  • Accuracy 156
  • Price 146
  • Privacy 46

Harvey · what they value

  • Time saved 72
  • Ease of use 50
  • Accuracy 29

Copilot · complaints

  • Accuracy 38
  • Privacy 28
  • Hallucination 11

Copilot · what they value

  • Time saved 17
  • Ease of use 17
  • Drafting quality 12

Counts are voices that name that complaint or value (top three per tool). A voice can name one of each. Not a comparison of raw totals: the bigger side has more posts of every kind.

In their own words

Each quote is a verbatim span of a counted voice, with its date and a link to the original.

On Harvey · verbatim

Hacker News
“Lawyer here: Harvey was never very good, or useful. It mostly exists so large law firms can say they do AI.”

in “Claude for Legal” · 9 voices

CriticizesPrice, valueSelf-described lawyer
Original thread Share
8 more voices in this thread
  • Hacker News · May 15, 2026ClaudeCriticizes“Everyone is busy discussing how amazing is this collection of markdown files for Claude... which Claude is known to randomly ignore.”open
  • Hacker News · May 15, 2026ClaudeCriticizes“These companies have marketed their products so badly (or well, depending on your viewpoint) that lawyers think that these tools are glorified search engines. Then they get busted in court because the LLM made up citations, quotations etc.”open
  • Hacker News · May 15, 2026ClaudeValuesCautiously optimistic about Claude's agent approach for legal drudgery, but lawyers remain accountable, not Anthropic. (summary, not a quote)open
  • Hacker News · May 15, 2026LegoraCriticizes“I have a friend that runs a firm and uses Legora and can’t stand it.”open
  • Hacker News · May 15, 2026ClaudeCriticizes“I think we should be realistic here, this is a more advanced version of those "will kits" that spit out a PDF.”open
  • Hacker News · May 14, 2026HarveyCriticizes“There's other companies that have a much better understanding of the market and compliance issues but you don't hear about them because nobody wants to talk about legal tech.”open
  • Hacker News · May 14, 2026ClaudeMixed“As a lawyer, I'm excited about this, but there are two roadblocks that I'm not sure how Anthropic will navigate:”open
  • Hacker News · May 14, 2026ClaudeNeutral“It seems like they ripped out Lexis, which is probably one of the most important tools for lawyers: https://github.com/anthropics/claude-for-legal/pull/5 .”open
Hacker News
“That benchmark in the report clearly shows that there is not much added value or moat in the custom training of Harvey.”

in “AI Market Clarity”

CriticizesBenchmarkUnverified voice
Original thread Share
Hacker News
“I believe that [...] this startup will win by having the UX that is best focused on lawyers and addresses lawyers' compliance concerns.”

in “Most AI startups are doomed” · 2 voices

ValuesEase of useUnverified voice
Original thread Share
1 more voice in this thread
  • Hacker News · Nov 28, 2023ValuesGenerative AI can speed lawyer workflow since legal documents are mostly configurable boilerplate; fake-citation cases were careless. (summary, not a quote)open

On Copilot · verbatim

Bl
Bluesky · bsky.app
“If so, I demand your Bar Number because you offered negligent advice, like that and not to use Copilot, which I recently did, cross-checked by two more AIs to construct and file a complaint, so maybe I'm familiar with law, just a bit.”
ValuesDrafting qualityUnverified voice
Original thread Share
r/legaltech
“Copilot is deceptively expensive, especially Cowork”

in “Lawyers using ChatGPT: how are you protecting client data?” · 18 voices

CriticizesPriceUnverified voice
Original thread Share
17 more voices in this thread
  • r/legaltech · Oct 11, 2026CriticizesVendor documentation shows web search queries and EU data residency fall outside the no-training and DPA protections for Copilot, ChatGPT and Claude. (summary, not a quote)open
  • r/legaltech · Oct 9, 2026NeutralConsumer and business plans from OpenAI and Anthropic differ in data protection, yet none creates privilege and only enterprise API use gives zero retention. (summary, not a quote)open
  • r/legaltech · Oct 8, 2026ChatGPTValues“The contract is no different from them using any other tool out there.”open
  • r/legaltech · Oct 7, 2026ChatGPTCriticizes“A pivileged convo can get read by someone with zero duty to your client and you'll never know which is the risk to deal with.”open
  • r/legaltech · Oct 7, 2026NeutralClient data can be redacted with a small local model before it goes to Claude or ChatGPT, though open-source local models perform worse than closed ones. (summary, not a quote)open
  • r/legaltech · Oct 7, 2026ClaudeValuesLawyers should use the Claude Teams plan even as a solo practitioner and avoid putting protected third-party litigation data into lower tiers. (summary, not a quote)open
  • r/legaltech · Oct 6, 2026ClaudeCriticizes“GPT will always spot something that Claude has got wrong or missed, and visa versa”open
  • r/legaltech · Oct 6, 2026HarveyNeutral“I think a big part of Harvey and Legora’s moat is trust by association.”open
  • r/legaltech · Oct 6, 2026MixedNo-training settings on mid-tier plans are a good first step, but privilege protection depends on contractual terms covering retention, provider review access and admin controls. (summary, not a quote)open
  • r/legaltech · Oct 6, 2026ClaudeNeutralThe firm uses an Enterprise Claude plan installed locally with training disabled, avoids ChatGPT, and never enters confidential client data. (summary, not a quote)open
  • r/legaltech · Oct 6, 2026ChatGPTValues“I personally see that as overkill given how much data attorneys regularly entrust to digital providers without that same standard.”open
  • r/legaltech · Oct 6, 2026ChatGPTNeutral“It's only the pure consumer level plans that require opt-out instead of defaulting to it.”open
  • r/legaltech · Oct 6, 2026ChatGPTValues“Both of these services default to not training on any of your chats or data rather than requiring you to opt out. So quite affordable.”open
  • r/legaltech · Oct 6, 2026ChatGPTValues“Both of these services default to not training on any of your chats or data rather than requiring you to opt out. So quite affordable.”open
  • r/legaltech · Oct 6, 2026ClaudeNeutralEnterprise Claude would be an approved tool while personal Claude or ChatGPT accounts would not be. (summary, not a quote)open
  • r/legaltech · Oct 6, 2026ClaudeNeutral“This ruling says nothing about attorneys using AI and confidential information, it just confirms that AI tools are just as valid for search by authorities as is google, facebook, or any other digital tool on your machine.”open
  • r/legaltech · Oct 6, 2026ClaudeCriticizes“Even the paid Claude AI consumer plans do not contain a confidentiality rider.”open
r/legaltech
“Copilot is fine for pulling CPs out of a credit agreement or purchase agreement to make the initial draft checklist, but pushing your team toward a dedicated closing management tool is what actually helps with the manual administrative grind.”

in “Transactional checklist, project management and tracking”

MixedContract reviewUnverified voice
Original thread Share

When both come up in one thread

Voices from threads where posters name Harvey and Copilot. Open the thread for the whole exchange.

r/legaltech
Harvey
“I think a big part of Harvey and Legora’s moat is trust by association.”

in “Lawyers using ChatGPT: how are you protecting client data?” · 18 voices

NeutralGeneral useUnverified voice
Original thread Share
17 more voices in this thread
  • r/legaltech · Oct 11, 2026CriticizesVendor documentation shows web search queries and EU data residency fall outside the no-training and DPA protections for Copilot, ChatGPT and Claude. (summary, not a quote)open
  • r/legaltech · Oct 9, 2026NeutralConsumer and business plans from OpenAI and Anthropic differ in data protection, yet none creates privilege and only enterprise API use gives zero retention. (summary, not a quote)open
  • r/legaltech · Oct 8, 2026ChatGPTValues“The contract is no different from them using any other tool out there.”open
  • r/legaltech · Oct 7, 2026ChatGPTCriticizes“A pivileged convo can get read by someone with zero duty to your client and you'll never know which is the risk to deal with.”open
  • r/legaltech · Oct 7, 2026NeutralClient data can be redacted with a small local model before it goes to Claude or ChatGPT, though open-source local models perform worse than closed ones. (summary, not a quote)open
  • r/legaltech · Oct 7, 2026ClaudeValuesLawyers should use the Claude Teams plan even as a solo practitioner and avoid putting protected third-party litigation data into lower tiers. (summary, not a quote)open
  • r/legaltech · Oct 6, 2026ClaudeCriticizes“GPT will always spot something that Claude has got wrong or missed, and visa versa”open
  • r/legaltech · Oct 6, 2026CopilotCriticizes“Copilot is deceptively expensive, especially Cowork”open
  • r/legaltech · Oct 6, 2026MixedNo-training settings on mid-tier plans are a good first step, but privilege protection depends on contractual terms covering retention, provider review access and admin controls. (summary, not a quote)open
  • r/legaltech · Oct 6, 2026ClaudeNeutralThe firm uses an Enterprise Claude plan installed locally with training disabled, avoids ChatGPT, and never enters confidential client data. (summary, not a quote)open
  • r/legaltech · Oct 6, 2026ChatGPTValues“I personally see that as overkill given how much data attorneys regularly entrust to digital providers without that same standard.”open
  • r/legaltech · Oct 6, 2026ChatGPTNeutral“It's only the pure consumer level plans that require opt-out instead of defaulting to it.”open
  • r/legaltech · Oct 6, 2026ChatGPTValues“Both of these services default to not training on any of your chats or data rather than requiring you to opt out. So quite affordable.”open
  • r/legaltech · Oct 6, 2026ChatGPTValues“Both of these services default to not training on any of your chats or data rather than requiring you to opt out. So quite affordable.”open
  • r/legaltech · Oct 6, 2026ClaudeNeutralEnterprise Claude would be an approved tool while personal Claude or ChatGPT accounts would not be. (summary, not a quote)open
  • r/legaltech · Oct 6, 2026ClaudeNeutral“This ruling says nothing about attorneys using AI and confidential information, it just confirms that AI tools are just as valid for search by authorities as is google, facebook, or any other digital tool on your machine.”open
  • r/legaltech · Oct 6, 2026ClaudeCriticizes“Even the paid Claude AI consumer plans do not contain a confidentiality rider.”open
r/legaltech
Copilot
“Copilot is deceptively expensive, especially Cowork”

in “Lawyers using ChatGPT: how are you protecting client data?” · 18 voices

CriticizesPriceUnverified voice
Original thread Share
17 more voices in this thread
  • r/legaltech · Oct 11, 2026CriticizesVendor documentation shows web search queries and EU data residency fall outside the no-training and DPA protections for Copilot, ChatGPT and Claude. (summary, not a quote)open
  • r/legaltech · Oct 9, 2026NeutralConsumer and business plans from OpenAI and Anthropic differ in data protection, yet none creates privilege and only enterprise API use gives zero retention. (summary, not a quote)open
  • r/legaltech · Oct 8, 2026ChatGPTValues“The contract is no different from them using any other tool out there.”open
  • r/legaltech · Oct 7, 2026ChatGPTCriticizes“A pivileged convo can get read by someone with zero duty to your client and you'll never know which is the risk to deal with.”open
  • r/legaltech · Oct 7, 2026NeutralClient data can be redacted with a small local model before it goes to Claude or ChatGPT, though open-source local models perform worse than closed ones. (summary, not a quote)open
  • r/legaltech · Oct 7, 2026ClaudeValuesLawyers should use the Claude Teams plan even as a solo practitioner and avoid putting protected third-party litigation data into lower tiers. (summary, not a quote)open
  • r/legaltech · Oct 6, 2026ClaudeCriticizes“GPT will always spot something that Claude has got wrong or missed, and visa versa”open
  • r/legaltech · Oct 6, 2026HarveyNeutral“I think a big part of Harvey and Legora’s moat is trust by association.”open
  • r/legaltech · Oct 6, 2026MixedNo-training settings on mid-tier plans are a good first step, but privilege protection depends on contractual terms covering retention, provider review access and admin controls. (summary, not a quote)open
  • r/legaltech · Oct 6, 2026ClaudeNeutralThe firm uses an Enterprise Claude plan installed locally with training disabled, avoids ChatGPT, and never enters confidential client data. (summary, not a quote)open
  • r/legaltech · Oct 6, 2026ChatGPTValues“I personally see that as overkill given how much data attorneys regularly entrust to digital providers without that same standard.”open
  • r/legaltech · Oct 6, 2026ChatGPTNeutral“It's only the pure consumer level plans that require opt-out instead of defaulting to it.”open
  • r/legaltech · Oct 6, 2026ChatGPTValues“Both of these services default to not training on any of your chats or data rather than requiring you to opt out. So quite affordable.”open
  • r/legaltech · Oct 6, 2026ChatGPTValues“Both of these services default to not training on any of your chats or data rather than requiring you to opt out. So quite affordable.”open
  • r/legaltech · Oct 6, 2026ClaudeNeutralEnterprise Claude would be an approved tool while personal Claude or ChatGPT accounts would not be. (summary, not a quote)open
  • r/legaltech · Oct 6, 2026ClaudeNeutral“This ruling says nothing about attorneys using AI and confidential information, it just confirms that AI tools are just as valid for search by authorities as is google, facebook, or any other digital tool on your machine.”open
  • r/legaltech · Oct 6, 2026ClaudeCriticizes“Even the paid Claude AI consumer plans do not contain a confidentiality rider.”open
r/legaltech
Harvey
“I got pretty good use out of it for review of multiple docs at the one time and large DD exercises and generally found it pretty good as a drafting assistant”

in “Is co-pilot good enough for in-house generalist?” · 5 voices

ValuesTime savedUnverified voice
Original thread Share
4 more voices in this thread
  • r/legaltech · Aug 20, 2026SpellbookValues“Spellbook has been very helpful for first round edits/issues lists”open
  • r/legaltech · Aug 20, 2026SpellbookValues“I've been using it since it came out in beta and it is phenomenal and plugs right into Word.”open
  • r/legaltech · Aug 20, 2026CopilotNeutral“Use Copilot only for things you can verify from your own knowledge”open
  • r/legaltech · Aug 20, 2026CopilotValues“Kinda/yes - it’s mostly just a wrapper There are rumors they’ve been testing kimi in copilot which outperforms Anthropic and OpenAI on the Harvey bench (legal benchmark)”open
r/legaltech
Copilot
“Kinda/yes - it’s mostly just a wrapper There are rumors they’ve been testing kimi in copilot which outperforms Anthropic and OpenAI on the Harvey bench (legal benchmark)”

in “Is co-pilot good enough for in-house generalist?” · 5 voices

ValuesGeneral useUnverified voice
Original thread Share
4 more voices in this thread
  • r/legaltech · Aug 20, 2026SpellbookValues“Spellbook has been very helpful for first round edits/issues lists”open
  • r/legaltech · Aug 20, 2026SpellbookValues“I've been using it since it came out in beta and it is phenomenal and plugs right into Word.”open
  • r/legaltech · Aug 20, 2026CopilotNeutral“Use Copilot only for things you can verify from your own knowledge”open
  • r/legaltech · Aug 20, 2026HarveyValues“I got pretty good use out of it for review of multiple docs at the one time and large DD exercises and generally found it pretty good as a drafting assistant”open

Short answers

From the same record as the tables above.

Harvey vs Copilot for lawyers: what do lawyers say?

Harvey has net sentiment −21 on 749 public lawyer voices and Copilot has +5 on 155, as of . Copilot is ahead on this record: the two 90% bands do not overlap. Net is like minus dislike as a share of voices.

How many lawyers have posted about Harvey and Copilot?

We count 749 public voices on Harvey and 155 on Copilot, posted since 2023 by lawyers and people who work with them, as of . Each voice is one post or comment that names the tool.

Do lawyers feel better about Harvey or Copilot?

Net sentiment (like minus dislike, as a share of voices) is −21 for Harvey, 90% band −26 to −15, and +5 for Copilot, 90% band −7 to +16. Copilot has the higher net (+5 against −21) and the two 90% bands do not overlap. That describes who posts and how they feel, not which product is better.

What do lawyers use Harvey and Copilot for?

The task named most often on Harvey is general use (545 of 749 voices); on Copilot it is general use (78 of 155 voices). A voice has one task, set by our classifier.

Task reports with both: Legal research report · Drafting report · Summarization report