Comparing Top 3 DocuSign Alternatives for Law Firms

DocuSign is usually the go-to e-signature platform, known for its reliability. However, it’s not the best option in a lot of scenarios. Depending on your firm’s size, workflow, and need for legal-specific features, you will find a better fit with one of DocuSign’s top alternatives. 

In this article, we compare three leading DocuSign alternatives for law firms – Adobe Acrobat Sign, and RunSensible, and Clio Draft – to see how they stack up in terms of features, integration, pricing, and suitability for legal professionals. Our focus is on solo, small, and mid-sized firms in the U.S. and Canada, though we’ll note considerations for larger firms as well.

TL;DR The comparison table for a quick look

How to choose (fast)

• You just need e-signatures: Pick DocuSign or Adobe Sign and integrate with your practice management software (PMS) or document management software (DMS). 
• You draft the same forms again and again: Choose RunSensible for legal-grade automation, form builder, and e-signature. 

You want fewer vendors and better workflow integration: Go with RunSensible to centralize intake, drafting, signatures, storage, matters, communications, and basically everything you need to run and grow your firm.

DocuSign: The benchmark (and why firms are looking for alternatives)

DocuSign is the industry leader in electronic signatures and a benchmark for comparison. It offers a user-friendly way to prepare documents for signature with drag-and-drop fields and the ability to email clients a secure link to sign remotely. DocuSign provides legally binding e-signatures complete with audit trails to track who signed and when. It also supports advanced features like reusable templates and even customized branding on emails (for certain plans). Law firms appreciate that DocuSign meets rigorous security standards (encryption, SOC 2, ISO 27001, etc.) and maintains 99.9% uptime, ensuring reliability.

Strengths: DocuSign is widely accepted by courts and clients as a trusted e-signature method. It has a top-rated mobile app (4.9/5 on iOS) that makes signing on the go easy for attorneys and clients. Its interface guides users through sending documents to multiple signers (even in a specific order) and provides real-time status tracking and reminders. For large law firms or in-house legal teams, DocuSign also offers high-end plans and integrations – including contract lifecycle management (CLM) features – that can plug into enterprise systems. This scalability and flexibility make DocuSign a safe choice from solo practitioners up to big law.

Limitations: Despite its strengths, DocuSign is a general-purpose tool, not built exclusively for legal workflows. Out of the box, it does not provide legal form libraries or document drafting automation – lawyers must prepare the documents elsewhere, then upload to DocuSign for signatures. Many law firms end up using DocuSign alongside other software (like Microsoft Word for drafting and a practice management system for client files). This means integration is key: for example, practice management platforms like Smokeball tout their DocuSign integration so that signed documents are automatically saved to the matter, making a “paperless firm” easier to achieve. If your current legal software doesn’t have a built-in e-signature module, you’ll be managing an extra login and data silo with DocuSign. Additionally, pricing can be a consideration – DocuSign has no free tier and uses a tiered subscription model. For instance, a single user “Personal” plan is around $10/month (annual billing) but is very basic, while most law firms will need at least the “Standard” plan (~$25/user/month) or Business Pro (~$40/user/month) to get features like multiple signers and more automation. Enterprise plans go higher and require custom quotes. These costs add up as you add staff, and big firms may negotiate volume pricing.

Why Look for Alternatives? Many law firms seek DocuSign alternatives for a few reasons. Some find DocuSign’s features beyond e-signature to be limited for legal drafting – they want a solution that can also generate documents or populate court forms automatically. Others want tighter integration: DocuSign isn’t part of a practice management suite, whereas some alternatives are built into all-in-one legal software. Cost is another factor; firms may prefer a solution that bundles e-signatures with other tools under one transparent price. Lastly, while DocuSign is great for e-signing, there are now competitors tailored to legal workflows that can reduce the manual work of drafting documents. Let’s compare three such competitors: Adobe Acrobat Sign, Clio Draft, and RunSensible.

DocuSign Alternative #1 — Acrobat Sign: a trusted e-signature software with PDF Power

Adobe Acrobat Sign (often just called Adobe Sign, formerly EchoSign) is the e-signature offering from Adobe. It is functionally quite similar to DocuSign – in fact, these two are considered the top players in e-signature software. Adobe Sign allows you to send documents for electronic signature with a few clicks, add form fields for signers, and get notified when documents are signed. It integrates seamlessly with PDF workflows: if your firm already uses Adobe Acrobat for creating and editing PDFs, Adobe Sign fits in naturally. For example, you can open a PDF in Acrobat, add signature fields, and send it out via Adobe Sign in one interface.

Features and Benefits: Adobe Sign’s interface is user-friendly and streamlined. Preparing a document for signature is as simple as uploading a file (PDF or Word), dragging signature or initial fields to the right spots, and entering the signer’s email. Clients receive an email and can e-signature from any device without needing an Adobe account. Adobe Sign provides easy tracking of the signing status, with a dashboard that shows which documents are out for signature and sends real-time updates. It also offers reusable templates – you can save commonly used form field setups to reuse on new documents, saving time on documents you send frequently. For firms concerned about branding, higher-tier plans let you customize the signature request emails with your law firm’s logo and messaging. And like DocuSign, Adobe Sign ensures signatures are legally binding and secure, with audit trails and compliance measures in place (including encryption for documents at rest and in transit, and options for multi-factor signer authentication).

One advantage Adobe Sign might have for lawyers is its integration with the Adobe ecosystem. Many legal documents start as Word documents and end up as PDFs – especially court filings. With Adobe Sign, a document in PDF can be signed and even edited or redacted within the Adobe suite. In fact, both Adobe Sign and DocuSign advertise that they help law firms streamline not just signing but also tasks like PDF redaction (Adobe Sign naturally pairs with Adobe Acrobat’s redaction tools). If your firm heavily uses PDFs, Adobe Sign could feel more natural.

Pricing: Adobe Sign offers individual plans and business plans. For an individual user (annual plan), pricing starts at about $12.99/month for Acrobat Standard (which includes basic e-signature and PDF tools) and around $19.99/month for Acrobat Pro which adds more features like custom branding and sending to multiple recipients. Business plans for small teams start at roughly $14.99/month per user for the Standard tier, or $23.99/month per user for the Pro tier with advanced features, when billed annually. Large organizations can opt for Acrobat Sign Solutions (enterprise tier) which includes integrations and enhanced compliance, but pricing for that is by contacting Adobe sales. Notably, Adobe Sign (like DocuSign) does not have a free version, though free trials are available. In terms of cost, Adobe’s team plans might come out a bit lower per seat than DocuSign’s equivalent plans, but they are in a similar ballpark. Law firms should compare specific feature availability (for example, some compliance or identity verification features might only be in the enterprise tier).

Legal Workflow Integration: Similar to DocuSign, Adobe Sign is a standalone service that you can integrate into your legal workflow. It doesn’t come with a practice management system attached – you either use it on the web or through Adobe apps, or integrate it with other software via APIs. Many practice management solutions don’t yet have native Adobe Sign integrations (DocuSign’s market share in legal has been higher historically), so you might end up downloading signed PDFs from Adobe Sign and uploading into your case management system manually. That said, Adobe Sign can integrate with Microsoft 365, SharePoint, and other document management systems which some larger law offices use. For solo and small firms, if you’re already subscribing to Adobe Acrobat Pro DC for PDF editing, adding Adobe Sign can be a convenient way to get e-signature capability without juggling a separate subscription like DocuSign – it’s essentially bundling e-signature with your PDF tools. On the other hand, Adobe Sign doesn’t offer legal-specific content like court form libraries or clause templates. It’s mainly focused on the signing process itself.

When to consider Adobe Sign: If your law firm is already embedded in Adobe’s tools (Acrobat, etc.), or if you found DocuSign’s interface not to your liking, Adobe Sign is a top alternative. Its feature set and security are on par with DocuSign for core e-signature needs, and it can handle any document type that might cross a lawyer’s desk. Pricing is competitive, and for firms with modest e-signature needs, an Adobe plan might be cost-efficient. However, like DocuSign, it won’t draft your documents for you – you’ll still need separate solutions (or just Word and manual effort) to generate documents before sending for signature. This is where more legal-centric alternatives come into play, as we’ll see next with RunSensible and Clio Draft.

DocuSign Alternative #2 — RunSensible: drafting, forms library, and e-signature in native practice management software

RunSensible is a newer, all-in-one legal practice management platform. Its RunSensible Forms feature goes head-to-head with dedicated document automation tools, but the pitch is bigger: client intake, case management, time and billing, CRM, document assembly, and e-signature in one place. If you’re comparing DocuSign alternatives, RunSensible is appealing because it can replace e-signature tools and, in many firms, several other apps. Below is how its document and e-signature stack works.

Features and benefits. RunSensible Forms (launched August 2025) combines a large court form and legal template library with automation and built-in e-signature. The court forms are jurisdiction-specific and kept current, so you can pull the exact form you need—say, an Ontario Small Claims Court form or a California probate form—without hunting the web.

You don’t have to know the form name up front. RunSensible uses AI-guided workflows: describe the matter in plain language and it recommends the likely forms and documents, with guidance vetted by legal experts. It behaves more like a knowledgeable assistant than a static library.

Data flows from intake to document. Because RunSensible includes a legal CRM and powerful client intake tools, it already holds structured client and matter data. Forms pull that data to auto-fill fields and cut manual typing. This works with PDFs (including older non-fillable PDFs—RunSensible overlays fields) and Word-based templates. A Microsoft Word add-in lets you turn your own documents into synced templates, so you’re not limited to the built-in library. You can add conditional logic and smart clauses to handle variations, the same way advanced automation tools do.

E-signature is native. After you generate a document, add signature and initial fields, choose parties (pulled from contacts or case roles), and send for signature directly—no third-party service required. Documents are encrypted, audit-trailed, and stored with appropriate data residency for privacy laws like PIPEDA in Canada and HIPAA in the U.S. You can track status in real time, and completed documents file themselves back to the matter workspace. Drafting, sending, signing, and storage happen in one workflow, which removes a lot of admin juggling.

Compliance and accuracy. RunSensible is designed to align with legal-industry requirements (including HIPAA considerations and Law Society of Ontario tech standards). In pilot testing, firms reported up to a 70% reduction in document prep time and a 40% drop in error rates thanks to AI-guided forms and autofill. Fewer typos and missed fields mean fewer rejected filings, and the time savings are on par with what leading automation tools claim.

All-in-one integration. RunSensible isn’t only documents. It also covers matters, contacts, time and billing, tasks, calendar, internal chat, plus optional modules like a website builder and phone system. Information moves automatically across the lifecycle. An example flow: a client completes an online intake; the data populates the CRM and matter; a retainer agreement template pulls that data; the client signs electronically; the signed agreement lands in the matter; a workflow triggers billing or a follow-up task. You get one login and one support team. For small firms without IT staff, reducing “app fatigue” and hidden integration costs is a real benefit.

Pricing. RunSensible emphasizes transparent pricing.

• RunSensible (now with a hosted PDF court form library with autofill features): $1,440 per seat/year ($120 per user/month). Includes the 54,000+ form library, AI features, and e-signature.
• Practice management (“Execute” plan): $948 per seat/year (about $79/month).
• Bundle: $2,030 per user/year (about $169/month), a 15% discount versus buying separately. Enterprise volume pricing is available.

In practical terms, an attorney on the bundle pays around $169/month for the full stack. By comparison, pairing Clio Manage (around $89/month for an advanced plan) with a full-featured document automation tool (around $150/month) already lands near $239/month, before adding CRM or intake. If RunSensible saves hours of admin each month and replaces multiple subscriptions, the math can favor consolidation—even if the document automation price looks high in isolation.

Who it’s for. Solo, small, and midsize firms that want to modernize on a single platform will get the most value. It’s strong for multi-jurisdiction practices (U.S. and Canada coverage) and any team that lives in standard forms—immigration, workers’ comp, government filings—or handles high-volume onboarding where intake data feeds documents. Clients can sign from any device, which helps less tech-savvy users complete paperwork without friction. If you already have practice management software but lack document automation, you can still adopt RunSensible just for Forms and e-signature, with some overlap to consider.

Notes for large firms. The platform is relatively new, so larger organizations may want to pilot it within a department. Many big firms have entrenched systems—document management like iManage, enterprise CRM, etc.—so a full switch is a heavy lift. Even so, Forms can run as a standalone automation layer, and the cloud-based architecture plus APIs make integration feasible where needed.

Bottom line. DocuSign and Adobe Sign are excellent signers but depend on integrations for drafting and workflow. Clio Draft and RunSensible bring drafting and signing inside their ecosystems. The difference is packaging: Clio Draft is one piece of a broader suite with separate pricing, while RunSensible puts the full toolset under one umbrella with a single, predictable price. For firms that want fewer vendors, fewer glue-code integrations, and less nickel-and-diming as they grow, that unified approach is the draw.

 

DocuSign Alternative #3 — Clio Draft: legal document automation with e-signature, built into practice management software

Clio Draft is a document drafting and automation platform created specifically for law firms. It was formerly known as Lawyaw – a legal tech company that Clio (the makers of the popular Clio Manage practice management software) acquired and rebranded. Clio Draft is unlike DocuSign and Adobe Sign because it doesn’t just capture signatures; it actually helps you create the documents and forms in the first place. Think of it as two products in one: a legal document assembly tool (for generating letters, court forms, etc. from templates) and an e-signature tool, combined. Clio Draft is part of Clio’s broader suite of law practice software, which means if you already use Clio for case management, it plugs in seamlessly – though it can also function as a standalone drafting solution for non-Clio users.

Features and Benefits: Clio Draft’s core strength is document automation tailored to legal needs. It provides access to a library of up-to-date court forms and official legal templates across all 50 U.S. states (cloud-based, fillable PDFs). For example, if you need a state-specific civil complaint form or a family law filing, Clio Draft likely has it ready-to-fill. You can auto-populate these court forms with client data – either pulled from your Clio Manage database or entered into Clio Draft’s own intake fields. In addition to PDF forms, Clio Draft lets you convert your own Microsoft Word documents into intelligent templates. It offers a Word add-in so you can mark up your Word documents with fillable fields, clauses, and even conditional logic (to include/exclude text based on choices). This is extremely useful for repetitive documents like retainer agreements, wills, or contracts where much of the text is boilerplate but needs customization for each client. Essentially, Clio Draft can generate a stack of documents or forms in minutes by merging client/matter information into your templates – eliminating tedious re-typing and copy-paste errors.

Another standout feature is Clio Draft’s integrated e-signature capabilities. Unlike using a separate app (DocuSign) after drafting, Clio Draft allows you to collect electronic signatures on the documents right in the same workflow. You can define where signatures go, send the document to clients via email, and get notified when they sign – all within Clio Draft. 

Integration and Workflow: If you use Clio Manage for practice management, Clio Draft is a natural add-on. It pulls client and matter data from Clio Manage to fill documents, and can save generated documents (or signed copies) back into the matter’s folder in Clio. This tight integration means you don’t have to manually upload finished documents to your cases – it’s all connected. Even if you don’t use Clio Manage, Clio Draft provides a standalone cloud workspace (with its own data backend) to manage templates and client info. Many small firms that haven’t fully adopted a case management system use Clio Draft just for the drafting efficiency gains. It’s particularly beneficial for document-intensive practice areas. According to Clio, firms that deal with high volumes of similar documents (like immigration forms, estate planning, litigation forms, etc.) can get “95% of the work done through minimal time and effort” using automation in Clio Draft. By cutting out repetitive typing and reducing errors, lawyers can redirect that saved time to higher-value tasks or simply serve more clients.

Pricing: Clio Draft is sold as a pay-for-what-you-need product with modular pricing. You can subscribe to just the Court Forms library, just the Word Document automation, or both, depending on your needs. The pricing structure (as of recent data) works roughly as follows: The court forms automation module is about $63 per month (billed annually) for the base subscription, plus about $25/month per user (seat) you need. The Word document automation module is about $97 per month (annual) base + $25/month per user. If you bundle both modules, there’s a discount (saving roughly $40-$45/month) – the bundle runs around $125 per month* base + $25 per user. To illustrate, for one lawyer the full Clio Draft (both forms and template automation) would be roughly $150/month (about $1,800/year). For a small firm of three users, the cost might be around $195/month (about $2,340/year) for the bundle, since you pay the base plus $25 for each user. Additional state form libraries beyond your home state can be added for an extra fee (around $33/month per additional jurisdiction). Keep in mind these figures are if billed annually; month-to-month prices may be slightly higher. While this is not a trivial expense, consider that it can replace a lot of manual document work (and possibly other e-signature tools). Also note that Clio Draft is separate from Clio Manage’s pricing – if you also use Clio Manage (which can range from about $49 to $129 per user/month depending on plan) and Clio Grow (for CRM/intake, about $59 per month), you’ll need to budget for each piece or look at Clio’s bundled discounts for their full suite. In sum, Clio’s approach can become an investment across multiple products, which is something to weigh against an all-in-one solution.

Ideal For: Clio Draft is ideal for law firms that want to streamline drafting and signing within a unified platform, especially if they are already in the Clio ecosystem or are willing to be. Solo and mid-sized firms that handle a high volume of repetitive forms (like immigration, bankruptcy, personal injury with standard court forms, etc.) can save hundreds of hours by using Clio Draft’s templates and court form libraries. The fact that it’s cloud-based and offers collaboration (multiple users can work on templates, and you have version control via the Word add-in) means your team can work efficiently from anywhere. Clio Draft’s e-signature is sufficient for most needs, though if a firm had a very custom signing workflow or needed something like in-person Kiosk signing, they might still consider integrating DocuSign. For larger firms, Clio Draft could certainly be useful in specific departments (like mass torts or insurance defense groups generating lots of docs). However, large firms that already have enterprise document management systems or custom document assembly software might find overlap. 

Detailed comparison table: DocuSign vs Adobe Sign vs RunSensible vs Clio Draft

To recap the key differences, the table below summarizes how the four solutions compare on crucial factors for law firms:

 

(Table key: ✓= Yes/Strong support, ! = Partial/Limited, ⨯ = No support)

As the table shows, DocuSign and Adobe Sign are excellent at what they do (electronic signatures) and are proven solutions across industries, including legal. However, they require integration into a larger workflow for maximum benefit in a law firm setting. In other words, you’ll likely use them alongside a practice management system or a document assembly tool. Clio Draft and RunSensible take a more holistic approach for the legal field, by providing drafting and automation features out-of-the-box. Clio Draft is a great add-on if you’re in the Clio environment or need a dedicated legal drafting tool with e-sign. RunSensible is aiming to be a one-stop platform where your entire workflow from client intake to final signature and filing is handled in one place.

Conclusion: Which Solution Fits Your Law Firm Best?

Choosing the right e-signature and document solution comes down to your firm’s specific needs, budget, and existing tools. Here are a few scenarios to help you decide:

• “We just need a reliable way to get documents signed electronically.” If your primary goal is to expedite getting signatures and you’re otherwise happy with your document drafting process, a standalone e-signature platform like DocuSign or Adobe Sign will serve you well. They are trusted, secure, and widely accepted by clients and courts. DocuSign is often praised for its simplicity and robust features, while Adobe Sign might appeal if you’re already using PDF workflows. For a small firm, the cost of these can be relatively low (a few hundred dollars a year) and easily justified by the faster turnaround on signatures. Just be ready to manage an additional system and make sure signed documents are saved to your client files (which can be streamlined with integration or a bit of manual effort).
• “We want to automate document generation and signatures, but we’re not looking to change our whole practice management setup.” If you want powerful legal document automation without overhauling everything else, RunSensible and Clio Draft are strong choices. You can use Clio Draft even if you don’t use Clio for case management – it will act as a specialized drafting tool that significantly cuts down the time to draft and prepare forms. 

With RunSensible, you’ll get the same benefits of their extensive template library and e-signature but with a complete legal practice management software that works with it flawlessly. Keep in mind you’ll be paying almost the same price as Clio Draft but for a whole legal software suite. This investment pays off most when you truly leverage the automation and document management (the more documents you generate, the higher the ROI). 

Clio Draft and RunSensible could be overkill if you only draft two or three contracts a month, but lifesavers if you churn out many repetitive docs weekly. 

• “We prefer an all-in-one solution and are open to adopting a new platform to run our firm.” For firms that are frustrated with juggling multiple software or paying for several subscriptions, RunSensible presents an enticing proposition. By adopting RunSensible, you’re not just getting e-signatures – you’re potentially getting everything (case management, billing, CRM, document automation, etc.) in one package. This can streamline your operations and ensure every piece works together seamlessly. The trade-off is the commitment to a single ecosystem: you’d likely move your clients and matters into RunSensible to fully benefit. The reward is a highly automated workflow (their AI intake and autofill can drastically reduce admin work) and simplicity for support/training (one system to learn). RunSensible’s recent addition of Forms and e-signature shows it’s focused on needs of modern law firms that want to save time and reduce errors in document prep. If you’re a solo or small firm starting fresh, or if your current software stack feels disjointed, RunSensible could give you a competitive edge by letting you handle clients faster and more efficiently. Make sure to take advantage of their personalized demo offers – seeing how it auto-fills a court form or retainer in action will tell you if it matches your expectations. (Tip: RunSensible often cites up to 70% faster document prep in pilots – consider what that could mean for your workload and profitability.)
• “Our firm is large or has very custom processes – what about us?” Larger firms often have unique requirements, like bespoke document templates or integrations with on-premises systems. DocuSign, with its mature API and enterprise features, might still be the safest bet to slot into a custom environment. That said, RunSensible’s enterprise solutions allow you to basically get a fully customized, tailored workflow around your firm’s needs. 

It’s also possible for large organizations to run pilot programs. For example, a big firm could test RunSensible in one office to gauge efficiency gains while maintaining other systems elsewhere. The key for large firms is integration and data migration considerations, which require a deeper discussion with these vendors.

If your firm is looking to save time, reduce errors, and improve client experience in the signing and document process, it’s worth exploring these alternatives further. Consider taking advantage of free trials or demos: for instance, RunSensible offers personalized demos where they’ll show how you can prepare and file court forms in minutes instead of hours. Seeing these tools in action with a legal use-case will make the decision much clearer.

 

FAQs

1) What are the top DocuSign alternatives for law firms in the US and Canada?

Adobe Acrobat Sign, Clio Draft, and RunSensible are three of the leading DocuSign alternatives for law firms in the US and Canada. Adobe Sign is strong for PDF-heavy teams, Clio Draft adds legal document automation, and RunSensible combines an all-in-one practice management suite with a court form library, autofill, and conditional document automation.

2) Adobe Sign vs DocuSign — which one is better for law firm e-signature workflows?

Both deliver secure e-signature, multi-party routing, and audit trails. DocuSign is a vendor-agnostic e-sign leader with broad integrations, while Adobe Sign fits best if your firm already works in Acrobat and PDF workflows. Neither includes a legal forms library or full legal document automation out of the box.

3) Clio Draft vs RunSensible — what is the difference for legal document automation and court forms?

Clio Draft focuses on legal document automation with a court forms library and a Word add-in; it can run standalone or alongside Clio Manage. RunSensible is an all-in-one practice management platform with Forms, a large court forms library, MS Word add-in, intake-to-doc autofill, handling for older non-fillable PDFs, and built-in e-signature. Clio Draft is modular pricing, while RunSensible emphasizes transparent, suite-based pricing without upsells.

4) Do DocuSign or Adobe Sign include a court forms library or legal document automation?

No. DocuSign and Adobe Sign are e-signature tools; you prepare documents elsewhere and then send for signature. For legal document automation and court forms libraries, consider Clio Draft or RunSensible Forms, both of which let firms autofill documents from client intake data and place e-sign fields in the same workflow.

5) How should a solo or mid-sized firm choose e-signature and practice management integration?

If you only need e-signature, DocuSign or Adobe Sign work well. If you need legal document automation and a court forms library, Clio Draft is a strong option. If you prefer one platform for intake, drafting, e-sign, storage, billing, and tasks, RunSensible’s all-in-one practice management with Forms offers the tightest integration and transparent pricing.

 

Sources

DocuSign vs Adobe Sign: A Comprehensive Comparison for Law Firms | Clio

Docusign for Legal Teams

Legal Electronic Signature Software | Smokeball

Clio Draft Review | LexWorkplace

Clio Draft Pricing | Lawyaw

Clio Pricing: A Comprehensive Guide | Capterra

Clio Pricing 2025: Is Clio Worth It?

RunSensible Introduces AI Platform With 54,000+ Court/Legal Forms to Automate Legal Work by 70%

Automation For Legal Documents And Software For E-Signatures – RunSensible