Judicex vs Platinum

Bottom line

Judicex is free, while Platinum is paid. Judicex is open source and Platinum is not. You can run Judicex on your own machine or server; Platinum is hosted by the vendor.

Which one should you try?

Judicex

Free

Best for Law firms prioritizing confidentiality and local control over cloud SaaS

Visit Judicex See full review

Platinum

Paid

Best for Local service businesses

Visit Platinum See full review

Pricing, capabilities and platforms side by side. Prices are as of the "Pricing checked" date in the table.

Judicex

Judicex runs as a local Flask workspace where you ingest official sources and matter files into a SQLite knowledge base, then draft, chat, and run workflow checks against only what you fed it. The LLM answers are bound to that evidence store — the vendor describes this as an 'answer contract that fails closed instead of hallucinating.' You deploy it on your own infrastructure, which means client files never leave your network. The MCP server lets you connect external tools, and JSON workflow packs let you encode firm-specific matter analysis profiles. The ceiling appears when your team grows past a handful of users — multi-tenant auth and SSO are on the roadmap but not yet shipped.

Platinum

Platinum.ai generates an llms.txt profile for your business: a machine-readable file, formatted to the open llms.txt standard, that sits on your domain and hands agents your services, pricing, hours, and policies in under 600 tokens instead of requiring a full page scrape. The vendor states profiles are built using over 150 industry-specific blueprints, so the fields agents look for when evaluating a dental clinic differ from those for a law firm. You upload one file — no code changes, no redesign, no plugin. The ceiling appears quickly: this is a static document, so anything that changes on your site requires a manual update or a return purchase. Teams with fast-moving pricing or rotating service lines will find the file stale within weeks.

Attribute	Judicex	Platinum
Pricing	Free	Paid
Price	—	From $99 one-time
Pricing checked	Not checked yet	Jul 1, 2026
Free trial	Not stated	Not stated
Open source	Yes	No
Has API	Yes	No
Self-hosted option	Yes	No
Platforms	Python (backend), Flask (web UI), JavaScript (frontend), CLI, MCP stdio server. Runs on macOS, Linux, Windows.	—
Pros	Evidence-bound answer generation, so a citation in a draft traces back to a specific ingested source rather than a plausible-sounding hallucination that could end up in a filing. Full self-hosted deployment with no cloud vendor data access, which means client confidentiality obligations and regulated-jurisdiction data residency requirements are met without negotiating a DPA with a SaaS provider. Apache-2.0 open-source license, so you can audit the full codebase before trusting it with privileged matter files — something no closed legal AI tool offers. Provider-agnostic LLM connectivity covering Ollama, OpenAI, Anthropic, and OpenAI-compatible endpoints, so swapping to a local model when a matter demands air-gapped operation is a configuration change, not a vendor conversation. Firm-specific workflow packs encoded as JSON, which means matter analysis profiles for debt recovery, injunctions, or file review can be versioned, shared across the team, and reproduced without rebuilding logic from scratch each time.	Delivers a machine-readable llms.txt file in the open standard format agents already look for, which means agents retrieving your domain get structured facts in under 600 tokens rather than burning budget on a JavaScript-heavy scrape that may still return wrong data. Over 150 industry-specific blueprints shape which facts get prioritized, so a dental clinic's profile surfaces credentialing and insurance fields that a generic summary would omit — the data agents actually weight when comparing providers in that category. One-time delivery with no plugin installation or site redesign required, which means your existing site architecture is untouched and there is no recurring dependency to manage or cancel. Puts your business in control of the facts agents cite about you, replacing the current default — scraped directories, cached reviews, outdated listings — with a source you authored and can correct.
Cons	Multi-user access control does not exist: the repository roadmap describes multi-tenant deployment, SSO, and audit logging as future work not yet released. A firm with more than one or two practitioners sharing the system has no user separation or access audit trail — teams with compliance requirements around matter access logs cannot use this in production until those features ship. No managed hosting path exists today. Deploying Judicex requires comfort running Python services, managing SQLite storage, and keeping a self-hosted LLM endpoint or API key in a secure configuration. A solo practitioner without someone to own that infrastructure either hires for it or moves to a hosted legal AI SaaS — at which point the confidentiality advantage disappears. The project has five commits and 17 stars at the time of curation, which means community-sourced bug fixes, integration examples, and operational guidance are essentially nonexistent. Teams that hit an edge case are filing the first issue, not searching a resolved one.	The profile is a static file with no automated sync to your live site — the moment your pricing, hours, or services change, agents reading your llms.txt will retrieve stale facts, recreating the misinformation problem the service is sold to prevent. Teams with any price volatility will need to repurchase or manually maintain the file. There is no API, no CMS integration, and no described webhook or trigger mechanism, which means businesses that update offerings frequently have no path to keeping the file current short of manual intervention every time something changes. Because the output is a text file with no performance tracking, there is no signal telling you whether agents are actually reading it, which queries it is answering, or whether it is affecting how often your business appears in agent-driven comparisons — teams that need attribution data will find nothing here and move to structured schema implementations with analytics hooks instead.

Made up your mind?

Judicex

Free

Best for Law firms prioritizing confidentiality and local control over cloud SaaS

Visit Judicex See full review

Platinum

Paid

Best for Local service businesses

Visit Platinum See full review

Specs come from each tool's own site and docs (how we test). AIDiveForge is editorially independent.

Judicex vs Platinum

Which one should you try?

Judicex

Platinum

Judicex

Platinum

Made up your mind?

Judicex

Platinum

Related comparisons

Free trials & curated lists