Legal Tech Raised $6Bn in 2025 as AI Boom Shows Divisions
Legal tech closed 2025 with $5.99 billion raised and fourteen $100m+ rounds. Valuations and revenue growth were extraordinary for a few standouts - and stubbornly flat for many others. Robin AI hit funding trouble. Dozens of companies that raised between 2020 and 2023 have yet to raise again.
Venture funding in 2025: up dollars, fewer deals
The figures exclude debt financing by public legal tech companies (e.g., Wolters Kluwer) and funds raising money to invest in startups. The distribution across Seed and later stages was uneven, with significant concentration in a small set of outliers.
- Total raised: $5.99 billion, up 22%
- Number of companies: 292, down -27%
- Number of investors: 539, down -31%
The compliance elephant
Compliance overshadowed legal yet again. Companies in GRC collectively raised about $27 billion in 2025. Think Vanta, Verisk, OneTrust, TrustArc, Palantir. This matters for legal buyers: budgets, product roadmaps, and platform choices across the enterprise are increasingly defined by compliance needs. Legal tech that plugs into that stack wins the procurement cycle before point tools ever get a meeting.
Mega-rounds that set the tone
Harvey raised four rounds totaling $818 million and announced an $8 billion valuation on October 29. Hours earlier, Legora set a $1.8 billion valuation with a $150 million Series C. Clio followed with two venture-and-debt rounds totaling $850 million, on top of a $900 million raise in 2024.
Filevine ($260m), Peregrine ($190m), and EvenUp ($150m) posted outsized 2025 rounds as well. These few names captured a disproportionate share of capital and attention.
Valuations vs exit value
Valuation headlines are easy. Exit prices are what count. Only 10% of acquisition announcements (6 of 59) disclosed numbers in 2025.
- Total disclosed exit value: $2.29 billion, down -39% from 2024
- Top exit: vLex at $1 billion
- Top ROI: Libra at 90x - a $105 million exit on a $1.17 million investment
For context, Manus AI was reportedly acquired by Meta for $2 billion after going from zero to $100 million in ARR in eight months. Lawyers used Manus to "vibe code" major legal AI features for free. Yet Manus is valued lower than Harvey and trails Libra's multiple. That gap raises a fair question for 2026: are legal AI valuations pricing future dominance, or just momentum?
Recurring revenue: real, fast, uneven
ARR became a marketing metric this year. Libra's revenue moved from $2 million to $3 million within weeks. GC AI reported $1 million to $10 million in one year. Harvey reached $100 million ARR within three years.
For comparison, Clio took 17 years and Litera 30 years to top a reported $300M+ ARR. AI-first revenue growth is faster - but young ARR can be fragile if it's driven by pilots, heavy discounts, or single-feature stickiness. If you buy based on ARR claims, ask what's underneath.
ARR can hide churn, discounting, and services-heavy revenue. Don't take topline at face value.
What this means for law firms and legal ops
The market is strong but concentrated. That creates selection risk for buyers and survival risk for mid-tier vendors. Treat 2026 as a year to tighten vendor standards and negotiate from data, not slides.
Procurement checklist for AI-led tools:
- Revenue quality: Break out ARR by product, logo cohorts, net revenue retention, gross margin, services mix, payback period, and burn multiple.
- Security and compliance: ISO 27001/SOC 2 status and scope, data residency, retention, model privacy, human-in-the-loop controls, and your DPA terms reflected in product settings.
- Model dependencies: Which LLMs and vector stores are used, fallback plans, content filtering, and how costs pass through to you.
- Product durability: Uptime SLAs, rate-limit handling, export and deletion, versioning, and audit logs suitable for client audits.
- Legal risk: IP indemnities for outputs, confidentiality assurances, model training on your data (opt-in only), and breach notification timelines.
- Commercials: Usage tiers, overage pricing, true-up windows, renewal caps, and off-ramps if the vendor is acquired or sunsets features.
- Vendor health: Runway, debt terms, customer concentration, and the extent of reliance on one mega-partner.
What to watch in 2026
- Consolidation: More acqui-hires and quiet shutdowns among 2020-2023 cohorts that never raised again.
- Down or inside rounds: Valuations compress for companies without defensible distribution or proprietary data advantages.
- Compliance-first platforms: GRC vendors keep bundling legal workflows; expect more "legal inside" rather than standalone tools.
- AI orchestration vs suites: Buyers will favor orchestration layers that plug into document, matter, and knowledge systems without heavy rewiring.
- Pricing models: Shift from per-seat to usage-based with minimums; audit your usage data monthly to avoid surprise bills.
How legal teams can act now
- Map your top five workflows by time spent and error cost; pilot AI where outcomes are measurable in 30-60 days.
- Set success metrics upfront: turnaround time, quality thresholds, review rates, and dollar impact per matter.
- Standardize prompts, templates, and review checklists; reduce variance before you scale.
- Lock in data protections and exit rights before you add users; it's 10x harder later.
- Monitor vendor concentration quarterly; keep one credible Plan B for each critical workflow.
Want structured upskilling?
If your team needs a practical path to evaluate and implement AI across legal work and operations, browse these curated programs by role: Complete AI Training - Courses by Job.
Your membership also unlocks:
