What Predict replaces — and what it doesn't.
Four things plaintiff PI attorneys currently use to put a number on a case. Each comparison includes where the alternative still wins, because pretending it doesn't is how trust gets broken.
Predict is a case-value model for plaintiff PI attorneys. It estimates the gross case value of a motor-vehicle-accident or premises-liability case in your jurisdiction — before attorney fees, case costs, and liens — and shows every estimate with a confidence band so you can see how firm the number is.
- Compare
vs Gut + Spreadsheet
The default tool — instinct, comparable matters in a shared sheet, a partner you can ask. Where Predict adds discipline and where it overlaps.
- Them
- Free, fast, in your head.
- Predict
- Defensible, jurisdiction-tuned, in 60 seconds.
Honest overlap: both lean on your read of comparable matters. The difference is Predict scores that read against a verdict cohort and shows the band, instead of leaving a single number sitting unexamined in a cell.
Read the comparison → - Compare
vs Verdict Search
The legal database the bar has used for 30 years. Where lookup wins, where modeled valuation wins, and the honest overlap between them.
- Them
- A library of comparable matters.
- Predict
- The model that values cases on top of one.
Honest overlap: both rest on real comparable verdicts. The difference is Predict weights and tunes that cohort to your jurisdiction and shows the band, instead of leaving you to eyeball a results list.
Read the comparison → - Compare
vs Settlement evaluators
Third-party valuation firms that hand-write a memo per case. Where the human review pays off and where the per-case cost stops making sense.
- Them
- ~$1,500 per case, 1–2 weeks.
- Predict
- $499 per seat / month, unlimited, 60 sec.
Honest overlap: both give you a defensible written number. The difference is Predict returns it in about 60 seconds at a flat per-seat price, so it stays worth running on every case — including the high-value ones — while a per-case memo is reserved for the rare, genuinely novel outlier.
Read the comparison → - Compare
vs Carrier-side AI
The proprietary claims-AI insurance carriers have been using since 2014. Same kind of instrument — built deliberately for the other side of the table.
- Them
- Closed model, carrier-trained, plaintiff-blind.
- Predict
- Plaintiff-side training data, with the cohort shown.
Honest overlap: both are statistical valuation models. The difference is whose outcomes trained them. Predict is built only on plaintiff-side data, and every number arrives with the comparable cohort behind it, so the answer is sourced to your side of the table.
Read the comparison →
90–92% median accuracy (MdAPE) on higher-value cases, across a held-out test set of motor-vehicle-accident and premises cases.
Every estimate is jurisdiction-tuned and reported with a confidence band — a dollar figure plus or minus a stated range at 90% confidence — with the comparable-verdict cohort it was built on shown alongside it. See the accuracy results →
Stop comparing on our word. Run one of your own cases.
Enter the facts of a real matter from your pipeline. In about 60 seconds you will see the predicted value, its confidence band, and the comparable verdicts behind it. The 14-day trial is free, with $0 charged today.