Jurilo & Swiss legal AI compared beyond basic RAG

Your HR team needs a usable answer: what applies, what is missing and what to do next. Finding a relevant legal paragraph is only the beginning.

An employment contract needs checking. A manager wants to change working hours. An employee’s circumstances complicate a planned termination. For an SME owner or HR team, the useful legal AI is the one that helps work through the facts and prepare the next step. A convincing answer with a citation can still miss the point.

Basic RAG—retrieval-augmented generation—finds relevant passages and gives them to a language model to produce an answer. It can improve access to information. It does not, by itself, establish that the right rules have been found, their relationships understood or their conditions satisfied.

Consider a question about ending an employment contract. Finding the standard notice period is only one part of the work. A useful assessment may also require contractual terms, dates, applicable agreements and facts about the employee’s circumstances. If the system misses a decisive dependency, a polished answer with citations can still fail the user.

The problem with a basic retrieve-and-answer approach is completeness and application. Searching more documents does not automatically solve either problem. The foundational RAG paper dates to 2020. The meaningful question today is how effectively a product reasons over and verifies the information it retrieves.

A 2024 study of US legal research tools found that retrieval-based systems reduced hallucinations relative to the chatbot tested but did not eliminate them. This supports testing answer quality; it does not establish how today’s Swiss products perform.

Jurilo’s proposition: Swiss-law reasoning built around everyday business decisions.

Its Legal Graph™ is designed to connect rules, dependencies and exceptions within a multi-step reasoning process. The intended benefit is an answer that connects your facts to the legal assessment, with risks, sources and next steps. That is a proposition to test on real work.

Jurilo Pro combines employment-law, Swiss Code of Obligations and social-insurance questions with contract review and drafting, at CHF 69/month under fair use. It explicitly serves HR teams and SMEs, including people without legal training. For these buyers, that combination is the reason to try it. Tax is a separate offering.

Below is one alphabetical comparison of the eleven specialist products. It focuses on buying decisions for SMEs and HR teams. Provider descriptions and prices were checked on 5 October 2026; these are advertised capabilities, not independently tested results. Monthly billing is shown where verified; annual equivalents are labelled. VAT treatment is noted where verified. An unspecified capability or term should not be read as unavailable.

What the table tells an SME buyer: Jurilo combines an explicit HR focus, review and drafting, and a published CHF 69 monthly Pro price. DeepLegal has a lower entry price and includes up to three users, but document analysis is still advertised as coming soon. Broader professional workspaces offer benefits such as Word workflows, specialist literature or configurable agents, with different costs and limits. Jurilo’s advantages should be judged against the work your team actually needs.

Simply test it yourself. Same facts. Same documents. Same standard.

Use three anonymised examples from your own business: an employment-contract clause, a policy change and a termination scenario with an important complication. Ask each product: “What information is missing? Which rules and exceptions matter? What should we do next? Draft the relevant wording and explain its assumptions.” Then change one decisive fact and check whether the reasoning changes appropriately.

Open the cited sources. Check whether they support the conclusion. Look for relevant exceptions, explicit assumptions and useful next steps. Where possible, have a qualified professional compare the outputs without seeing the product names.

Count the material omissions and the time needed to check and correct each output. A longer answer or a larger source collection is not a result. The useful result is a well-supported assessment and a draft your team can review efficiently.

Try Jurilo with a real HR or business question. Check the reasoning. Open the sources. Decide which answer helps you move forward.