Claw vs Perfios Legal Search
Claw and Perfios both surface litigation information on a person or company, but they are built for different jobs. Here is how they actually compare, and which one fits your workflow.
Comparison · Litigation Search
If you are typing "Claw vs Perfios" into a search bar, you are probably trying to check litigation history on a person, a company, or a counterparty, and you have found two tools that both claim to help. The honest answer is that Claw and Perfios are not built for the same job. One is a legaltech platform for lawyers and legal teams doing case research, drafting, and case management. The other is a financial-data and analytics platform, built for banks, NBFCs, and BFSI onboarding, that includes a litigation screening product. This page explains the difference in plain terms, so you pick the right tool for what you actually need to do.
- Different jobs: Claw is a legaltech platform for case research, drafting, and case management. Perfios is a financial-data platform whose Litigation BI product does litigation screening for BFSI onboarding.
- Where Claw leads: litigation research depth, all-India High Court and Supreme Court coverage, semantic AI search, and court-ready citations.
- Where Perfios fits: fast, wide-net litigation risk screening as part of a bank, NBFC, or M&A onboarding and diligence workflow.
- Pick by task: researching and citing case law, choose Claw. Screening for risk at onboarding scale, choose Perfios.
01The problem: two different jobs, one search bar
People search "Claw vs Perfios" for different reasons, and that is exactly the problem. Both tools let you type in a name and get back litigation information, so from the outside they can look interchangeable. They are not.
Litigation research is a legal task
A lawyer preparing a case, drafting a citation, or advising a client needs to read the actual judgment, understand its reasoning, and cite it correctly in court. This is deep, single-matter work. It needs full-text search across High Courts and the Supreme Court, semantic understanding of the legal question, and citations that hold up when challenged.
Litigation screening is a risk task
A bank underwriting a loan, an NBFC onboarding a borrower, or an M&A team doing counterparty due diligence needs something different: a fast, standardised report that flags whether a person or entity has litigation history, across as many courts and case types as possible, so the risk team can decide whether to proceed. This is bulk, background-check work, usually run inside a larger KYC or onboarding pipeline.
Why the confusion happens
Both jobs involve searching court records by name, and both produce a result that looks like a "litigation check". But one is built for a lawyer building an argument, and the other is built for a risk team clearing a file. Picking the wrong tool for the job means either paying for depth you do not need, or getting a screening report when what you actually needed was case law you can cite.
A related question: due diligence tools generally
If you are comparing litigation screening tools more broadly, not just Claw and Perfios, see our guide to legal due diligence tools in India and the primer on what legal due diligence means.
02What to evaluate before you choose
Before comparing the two tools feature by feature, it helps to be clear on what actually matters for your use case.
- What job you are doing: legal research and case work, or risk screening as part of onboarding and diligence.
- Depth versus breadth: do you need the full text of a judgment and a citable authority, or a fast flag on whether litigation exists at all?
- Court and case-type coverage: High Court and Supreme Court case law, or a wider net across tribunals, consumer forums, and regulatory bodies for screening purposes.
- Where it fits in your stack: a standalone legal platform for a law firm or legal team, or a module inside a bank or NBFC’s onboarding and KYC pipeline.
- Output: a full-text judgment with a court-ready citation, or a risk-categorised PDF report.
Claw and Perfios both search court records by name. One is built for a lawyer citing a judgment. The other is built for a risk team clearing a file. That difference decides which tool you need.
03Claw and Perfios, compared
Both tools are described here on their own terms, for the job each is genuinely built for.
Top pick
Claw
An all-in-one legaltech platform built for litigation research, drafting, and case management, with all-India court depth.
Strengths
- AI-based case search across 30 crore judgements and 1.5 billion+ records, covering all 25 High Courts (1990 to 2026) and the Supreme Court (1950 to 2026), with results in under 5 seconds.
- Semantic and AI search that understands the legal question, not just a name match, with verified court-ready citations you can rely on in an argument.
- Beyond search, Claw adds case management and tracking across 9,102 courts and tribunals, an AI legal assistant (Legal GPT), and compliance automation, so litigation work does not stop at the search result.
- Built for lawyers, law firms, and corporate legal teams as a working platform, not a one-off screening report.
Keep in mind
- Claw is not a bulk KYC or credit-onboarding product. It is not built to plug into a bank’s lending pipeline the way a BFSI risk platform is.
Best for Lawyers, law firms, and in-house legal teams who need to research case law in depth and manage matters, not just flag whether litigation exists.
Perfios (Legal Search Report / Litigation BI)
A financial-data and analytics (BFSI) platform whose Litigation BI product delivers fast litigation screening reports as part of KYC and onboarding.
Strengths
- Broad case-type coverage for screening purposes: civil, criminal, RERA, tax, arbitration, consumer, NCLT, DRT, SEBI, revenue court, and labour court matters, drawn from 3,500+ courts and tribunals, per Perfios’ own product page (perfios.ai/legal-search-report).
- Search by name, DIN, CINO, case number, address, vehicle number, or FIR number, with AI-based fuzzy matching to catch name variations.
- Automatic risk categorisation (high, medium, low) and a ready PDF report, built to move fast through a risk or compliance workflow.
- Sits inside Perfios’ wider BFSI data platform, so it is a natural fit for lenders and onboarding teams already using Perfios for KYC, credit, or fraud checks.
Keep in mind
- Litigation search is one product within a much larger financial-data and analytics business built for banks, NBFCs, and BFSI onboarding. Legal research and case citation are not its primary focus.
- The output is built for a risk decision, a flag and a report, rather than for reading and citing a judgment in a legal argument.
- It does not offer case management, matter tracking, drafting, or an AI legal assistant. Those are outside its scope.
- Pricing is not published on Perfios’ own site (checked perfios.ai/legal-search-report on 17 September 2026). The page routes buyers to a "Request a Demo" form, so it is enterprise, quote-based, in line with the rest of Perfios’ BFSI products, and GST is not stated until a quote is issued.
Best for Banks, NBFCs, M&A teams, and compliance functions that need a fast litigation risk flag across a wide net of courts, as part of a larger onboarding or diligence workflow.
04Side-by-side comparison
| Aspect | Claw | Perfios (Litigation BI) |
|---|---|---|
| What it is | All-in-one legaltech platform for legal research, drafting, and case management | Financial-data and analytics (BFSI) platform with a litigation screening product |
| Built for | Lawyers, law firms, corporate legal teams | Banks, NBFCs, compliance and M&A due-diligence teams |
| Court/case coverage | 25 High Courts (1990-2026) + Supreme Court (1950-2026), 30 crore judgements, for search | 3,500+ courts and tribunals, 350M+ cases, broad case types, for screening |
| Bulk / wide-net risk screening | Not built for this. Claw is a single-matter research and management tool, not a KYC or onboarding screening product | Yes, this is what it is built for: 3,500+ courts and tribunals, name/ID fuzzy matching, and automatic risk categorisation for high-volume onboarding checks. Perfios leads here. |
| Search type | Semantic and AI search on the legal question | Name/ID-based fuzzy matching for screening |
| Output | Full judgment text, verified court-ready citation | Risk-categorised PDF screening report |
| Case management / tracking | Yes, 9,102 courts and tribunals, auto updates, alerts | No, screening only |
| AI legal assistant / drafting | Yes, Legal GPT and compliance automation | No |
| Pricing | Rs 1,099/month or Rs 10,999/year (Premium plan), exclusive of GST; includes case search, case management and AI tools | Not published on perfios.ai (checked perfios.ai/legal-search-report, 17 Sep 2026); quote-based, request a demo; GST not stated until quote |
05How to choose
The choice mostly comes down to who you are and what decision you are trying to make.
If you are a lawyer, law firm, or legal team who needs to research case law, find a citable judgment, and manage the matter after that, Claw is built for that job: deep, all-India case search, court-ready citations, and case management in one platform. If you are a bank, NBFC, compliance team, or M&A advisor running litigation checks as part of onboarding, KYC, or counterparty due diligence at volume, Perfios’ Litigation BI is built for that job: a fast, risk-categorised report across a wide net of courts and case types, inside a BFSI data platform you may already be using.
Some teams genuinely need both: a risk-screening layer for onboarding, and a legal research platform for the matters that follow. If you want to compare litigation screening options more broadly, see Perfios legal search alternatives and our wider guide to legal due diligence tools in India.
06Who should not buy Claw
Claw is not the right choice for every team reading this comparison, and it is worth saying plainly where Perfios, or a similar screening tool, is genuinely the better pick.
- You run bulk KYC or credit-onboarding checks. If your job is to screen hundreds or thousands of loan applicants or new customers a month for litigation history as part of a lending or onboarding pipeline, Claw is not built for that volume or that workflow. Perfios’ Litigation BI is built exactly for this, and is the better fit.
- You need a wide net across many case types, not deep case law. If you need one sweep that checks for consumer complaints, RERA disputes, tax matters, SEBI actions, and labour cases alongside civil and criminal litigation, Perfios’ wider net across 3,500+ courts and tribunals is built for that breadth. Claw’s search is focused on case law across the High Courts and Supreme Court, not this wider case-type sweep.
- You already run onboarding on Perfios for KYC, credit, or fraud checks. If your stack is already built around Perfios, adding its Litigation BI module is a simpler integration than bringing in a separate legal-research platform for the same task.
- You only need a fast risk flag, not a citable judgment. If all your team needs is a categorised risk report (high, medium, low) to clear a file, and nobody will read the underlying judgment or cite it in an argument, Perfios’ report format does that job directly. Paying for Claw’s research and case-management depth would mean paying for capability you will not use.
- You need reported-judgment depth and editorial headnotes above all else. Neither Claw nor Perfios is built for that. If deep, editorially curated case-law research is the priority rather than screening or all-India AI search, a specialist research database is the better fit; see our comparisons of Claw vs SCC Online and Claw vs Manupatra.
If any of the first four points describe your workflow, look at Perfios’ Litigation BI first. Claw is built for the opposite job: lawyers and legal teams who need to read, cite, and act on case law, and manage the matter after that, not just flag that litigation exists.
07Where Claw fits
Claw is an all-in-one legaltech platform for Indian advocates, law firms, and corporate legal teams, combining AI-based case search, an AI legal assistant (Legal GPT), case management, and compliance automation across all Indian courts and tribunals. It is positioned as India’s first all-in-one legaltech platform of this kind. (Facts on this page last verified 17 September 2026.)
Against Perfios specifically, the honest comparison is this: for litigation research depth, all-India High Court and Supreme Court coverage, semantic AI search, and court-ready citations, Claw leads, because that is the job it is built for. Perfios is not trying to compete there. Its strength is bulk litigation screening woven into a financial-data and KYC workflow, which Claw does not attempt to be. If your work is legal, case research, drafting, arguing, tracking, and managing matters, Claw is the fit. If your work is financial risk screening at onboarding scale, Perfios’ product is built for that instead.
08Sources and further reading
The tools discussed here, linked to their official sources:
- Claw: clawlaw.in
- Perfios Legal Search Report: perfios.ai/legal-search-report
- Perfios Litigation BI: perfios.ai/products/litigation-bi
- Supreme Court of India (official judgments): sci.gov.in
Coverage figures for Perfios are as stated on its own product pages above. Perfios does not publish pricing for its legal search or Litigation BI product; that was confirmed directly on its site on 17 September 2026, and should be re-checked with the vendor before you rely on it, since quote-based pricing can change. Claw pricing is as published on clawlaw.in. This page was last verified on 17 September 2026.
09Frequently asked questions
Is Perfios a legal research tool like Claw?
Not exactly. Perfios is a financial-data and analytics platform built for banks, NBFCs, and BFSI onboarding. Its Litigation BI / Legal Search Report product does litigation screening, a fast risk flag and report, rather than deep case-law research, drafting, or case citation. Claw is built specifically for legal research, drafting, and case management.
Which one has better court coverage, Claw or Perfios?
It depends what you mean by coverage. Claw covers all 25 High Courts (1990 to 2026) and the Supreme Court (1950 to 2026) for full-text, AI-based case search with court-ready citations, and 9,102 courts and tribunals for case management and tracking. Perfios draws on a wider net of 3,500+ courts and tribunals for screening purposes, across many case types, but as a risk flag and report rather than citable case law. On pure breadth for bulk screening, Perfios genuinely leads; on depth of citable case-law search, Claw leads.
Can I use Perfios to cite a judgment in court?
Perfios’ product is built for litigation risk screening, a report that flags whether litigation exists and categorises the risk, not for reading full judgment text or generating a court-ready citation for legal argument. For that, a case-law research tool built for lawyers, like Claw, is the right fit.
Does Claw do bulk KYC or onboarding-style litigation screening?
Claw is built for legal research, drafting, and case management for lawyers, law firms, and corporate legal teams, not as a bulk KYC or credit-onboarding screening product. Teams that need litigation checks built into a BFSI onboarding pipeline are better served by a platform built for that, such as Perfios.
How much do Claw and Perfios cost?
Claw’s Premium plan is Rs 1,099 per month, or Rs 10,999 per year, exclusive of GST, and includes case search, case management, and AI tools. Perfios does not publish pricing for its legal search product on its own site; perfios.ai/legal-search-report was checked on 17 September 2026 and routes buyers to a demo request instead of a price list, so it is enterprise, quote-based, in line with its other BFSI products, and GST is not stated until a quote is issued. Confirm current pricing directly with each vendor. Claw also has a free plan for individual advocates, with paid plans for teams and enterprises.
Can a law firm use Perfios and Claw together?
Yes, some teams do. A bank, NBFC, or law firm handling BFSI-side due diligence may use Perfios for fast litigation risk screening at onboarding, and Claw separately for legal research, citations, and case management once a matter needs real legal work.