Juro vs Responsive
Which one do AI engines recommend, and how do they differ on price, fit and features?
The short answer
Responsive is the stronger AI pick in Proposals & Contracts: it has a visibility score of 10.7 versus 6 for Juro, and ranks ahead in 67% of the answers that name both.
Choose Juro if…
- AI answers describe it more positively (62% vs 33% positive)
- You need SOC 2 Type 2 coverage
- browser-native contract collaboration
- collaborative contracts that bypass legal bottlenecks
Choose Responsive if…
- You want the brand AI engines rank higher (10.7 vs 6)
- You need GDPR or AICPA SOC 2 or ISO 27001 or ISO 27701 or ISO 42001 or CCPA or STAR Level 1 coverage
- You prefer a larger, established vendor (501–1,000 employees)
- Strong enterprise choice for high-volume RFPs
AI visibility side by side
Latest weekly run · Nov 2
| Metric | Juro | Responsive |
|---|---|---|
| Visibility score | 6% | 10.7% |
| Change vs last week | New | New |
| Rank in Proposals & Contracts | #16 | #10 |
| Share of voice | 2.4% | 4% |
| Mentions this run | 13 | 20 |
| Positive in AI answers | 62% | 33% |
The stronger value in each row is marked with a ✓.
Visibility score trend
Weekly runs over the last 60 days
Juro 0pp · Responsive 0pp over 0 weekly runs.
Engine by engine
Responsive leads on 2 of 3 engines
Head to head in AI answers
3 engine answers name both brands
| Prompt | Engine | Juro | Responsive |
|---|---|---|---|
| Best proposal and contract tool for startups | AI Mode | #5 | #4 |
| Alternatives to the most popular proposal and contract tool | Perplexity | #8 | #12 |
| Official website of the top proposal and contract tool vendors | ChatGPT | #12 | #4 |
Features, pricing & fit
| Dimension | Juro | Responsive |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing model | — | Flat tiers |
| Entry price | — | $10,000 / mo |
| Free plan | — | No |
| Deployment | Cloud-based, browser-based | Flexible hosting options |
| Integrations | — | 32+ |
| Compliance | SOC 2 Type 2 | GDPR, AICPA SOC 2, ISO 27001, ISO 27701, ISO 42001, CCPA, STAR Level 1 |
| Support | Help center, Implementation team, In-app chat | Professional Services with APMP-certified experts for onboarding and training, Premium deployment and support on Growth and Enterprise editions |
| Founded | 2016 | 2015 |
| Headquarters | London, United Kingdom | Frisco, Texas, United States |
| Employees | 51–200 | 501–1,000 |
| Funding | Series B · $39M raised | Round led by Elevate Capital |
| Best for | Fast-growing businesses whose sales, HR and operations teams need to create and send contracts without waiting on legal, while legal keeps control of templates and review. | Dedicated proposal or operations teams with legal, InfoSec and compliance involvement, and global or multi-region operations. |
Plans side by side
Juro
Pricing not available.
Responsive
Pros and cons
Themes from the AI answers that mention each brand
Juro
- browser-native contract collaboration
- collaborative contracts that bypass legal bottlenecks
- suits startups with an in-house legal team
- modern contract workflows
- covers many contract types such as MSAs, SaaS agreements, DPAs and NDAs
Responsive
- Strong enterprise choice for high-volume RFPs
- Designed for complex enterprise responses
- Top pick for RFP response management
- Good for security questionnaires and large-scale content reuse
- Recommended in G2's 2026 RFP software list
Data collected ·ChatGPT, Perplexity, Google AI Mode·coverage 100%·next run
Cite as: SlateIndex, “Juro vs Responsive”, https://slateindex.ai/compare/juro-vs-responsive, data of Nov 2, 2026. Licence: CC BY 4.0.