Contract lifecycle management and e-signature · November 2026 Edition
DocuSign vs DocuSign CLM
Zero of fourteen models named DocuSign first on the direct prompt; one named DocuSign CLM. DocuSign was named by thirteen of the fourteen models and DocuSign CLM by twelve and DocuSign carries 20 labels and DocuSign CLM 36, so the shares are not directly comparable.
San Francisco, United States, founded 2003. Named in four categories this edition.
By Docusign, San Francisco, United States, founded 2003. Named in two categories this edition.
First-choice share4%4%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate10%36%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#6#8A position in a field of 15; printed, not drawn.
Labels2036A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, DocuSign reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.Ironclad was named alongside these two in ten of the fourteen direct answers. PandaDoc vs DocuSign · PandaDoc vs DocuSign CLM · Ironclad vs DocuSign
Share is the count of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts over all fourteen models, for a mid-market B2B company; rank is within the category; every quote names the model and the prompt it came from. Both figures come from the contract lifecycle management and e-signature page.
By framing
How many of the fourteen models made each the first choice, per way of asking, and how many argued against it.
DocuSignFirst choices, of fourteen modelsDocuSign CLM
Direct01
Paraphrase201 against DocuSign
Comparative001 against DocuSign CLM
Budget-constrained001 against DocuSign · 3 against DocuSign CLM
Scale-constrained01
Negative009 against DocuSign CLM
Bars are first choices, 0 to 14 each sideModels that argued againstA model can name both, so the two sides of a row do not sum to fourteen.
Every model, every framing
The eighty-four answers behind the chart above, one cell each: where DocuSign and DocuSign CLM stood in it.
| Model | Direct | Paraphrase | Comparative | Budget-constrained | Scale-constrained | Negative |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | | | | |||
| GPT-5.4 mini | | | ||||
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | | | | |||
| Perplexity Sonar | | | | | ||
| Grok 4.20 | | | | | | |
| Mistral Small | | | ||||
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | | | | | ||
| Llama 4 Maverick | ||||||
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | | | | | | |
| Kimi K2 | | | | | ||
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | | | | |||
| MiniMax M2.5 | | | | |||
| GPT-6 Luna | | |||||
| Muse Glimmer 30B | | | |
DocuSign DocuSign CLM first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, DocuSign on the left and DocuSign CLM on the right.The direct prompt
The plain question, one answer per model, grouped by where DocuSign and DocuSign CLM stood in it.
DocuSign CLM first, DocuSign not the choice
1 of 14 modelsDocuSign was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.Qwen 3.7 FlashDocuSign CLM alternatives: Cloudfusion, Ironclad, Pactum.io
Neither was the first choice, one was named
4 of 14 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.Claude Haiku 4.5LinkSquares alternatives: Concord, ContractSafe, DocuSign CLM
GPT-5.4 miniIronclad alternatives: Conga CLM, DocuSign CLM, Juro, LinkSquares, Salesforce Revenue Cloud, SpotDraft
Grok 4.20Ironclad alternatives: CobbleStone Software, Conga CLM, ContractSafe, DocuSign, LinkSquares
DeepSeek V4 FlashIronclad, LinkSquares alternatives: Agiloft Contract Management Suite, ContractWorks, DocuSign CLM
Neither was named
9 of 14 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.Gemini 3.5 FlashIronclad alternatives: Conga CLM, Juro, Malbek, SpotDraft
Perplexity SonarJuro alternatives: ContractSafe, Ironclad, Oneflow, PandaDoc
Mistral SmallIronclad alternatives: Agiloft Contract Management Suite, Juro, PandaDoc, SpotDraft
Llama 4 Maverickno first choice
Kimi K2Ironclad alternatives: Agiloft Contract Management Suite, Concord, Conga CLM, LinkSquares
GLM 4.7 FlashXLinkSquares, PandaDoc alternatives: Agiloft Contract Management Suite, Juro
MiniMax M2.5Concord alternatives: Agiloft Contract Management Suite, LinkSquares
GPT-6 LunaSpotDraft alternatives: Ironclad, Juro
Muse Glimmer 30BIronclad, LinkSquares CLM alternatives: Agiloft Contract Management Suite, Bind, Concord, Gatekeeper, Juro, Oneflow, PandaDoc, SpotDraft
Bold names in an answer are the products the judge labeled a first choice; a model naming several gives each of them that label. The full answer text for every row is in the record.
By buyer segment
The same question asked on behalf of a different buyer. Each standing is computed within its segment and they are never added together. The figures above are the mid-market standing, which is the one the category orders by.
Small business
Level: the same share of first choices.
DocuSign0%#11 of 16DocuSign CLM0%#15 of 16Mid-marketThe figures above
Level: the same share of first choices.
DocuSign4%#6 of 15DocuSign CLM4%#8 of 15Enterprise
DocuSign leads by seven points.
DocuSign16%#3 of 11DocuSign CLM9%#5 of 11What the models said about DocuSign
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Five of six in this category shown.
“Can become expensive quickly as your volume grows. Advanced CLM features (DocuSign CLM) often require significant setup time and higher costs” Gemini 3.5 Flash · paraphrase prompt · soft negative
“cannot afford the $50k+ price tag of enterprise competitors (like Ironclad or DocuSign)” Qwen 3.7 Flash · budget prompt · soft negative
“my default recommendation would be DocuSign if you want the safest all-around choice” GPT-5.4 mini · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“I would recommend DocuSign as the primary choice” MiniMax M2.5 · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“Pick DocuSign CLM if you need regulated-industry templates, widest integration ecosystem and legal-heavy approval chains.” Muse Glimmer 30B · paraphrase prompt · alternative
What the models said about DocuSign CLM
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Six of eight in this category shown.
“Dated user interface described as "reminiscent of designs from 2005"... Integration errors between CLM and signature workflows” Kimi K2 · negative prompt · hard negative
“Avoid enterprise solutions – Platforms like DocuSign CLM, Ironclad, or Icertis start at much higher price points” Kimi K2 · budget prompt · hard negative
“Avoid enterprise-focused products such as Ironclad or DocuSign CLM” Perplexity Sonar · budget prompt · hard negative
“Shortlist Ironclad, DocuSign CLM, Malbek, and one more based on your stack.” Grok 4.20 · scale prompt · first choice
“### 1. The Best Overall: DocuSign CLM” Qwen 3.7 Flash · direct prompt · first choice
“Choose DocuSign CLM or Conga if your contract process revolves almost entirely around your existing Salesforce CRM ecosystem” Gemini 3.5 Flash · comparative prompt · alternative
Also compared
PandaDoc vs DocuSignPandaDoc vs DocuSign CLMIronclad vs DocuSignIronclad vs DocuSign CLMConcord vs DocuSignConcord vs DocuSign CLMContractSafe vs DocuSignContractSafe vs DocuSign CLMLinkSquares vs DocuSignLinkSquares vs DocuSign CLMDocuSign vs ContractWorksContractWorks vs DocuSign CLMAll twenty-eight head-to-head pages and the full CLM standing
Comparisons are drawn for the top eight products in each category, each against each. The output is the models' output; nothing here is a recommendation by the index.