CosmoLex vs Actionstep for 2027: Pick by Fit and Cost

Start with the category decision

Choose CosmoLex if you want published per-user prices you can budget against and one platform for matters, billing and trust accounting. Choose Actionstep if you run a midsize firm, expect to add document automation or analytics, and can accept a quote plus an implementation partner before you see a price.

Ownership matters first because both products sit inside larger companies. CosmoLex is a brand of ProfitSolv, which owns CosmoLex, Orion, Rocket Matter and Tabs3 and secured a strategic investment co-led by FTV Capital and Lightyear Capital in June 2025. ProfitSolv client base: about 21,000 businesses according to LawNext (2025).

Actionstep is the buyer in a different deal. It acquired Soluno, a Toronto-based legal accounting company, from AffiniPay in September 2023, and it said it intended to integrate the two into one platform for midsize firms. Actionstep cited approaching 1,000 legal professional customers in the US at that time, according to Legal Technology (2023). Neither product is renamed, merged or discontinued in the sources checked, but those sources do not show whether the Soluno integration is finished, so ask Actionstep which product your contract covers.

Legal accounting software keeps client trust money separate from firm operating money and produces the reconciliation reports that trust-account rules require. For a wider set of options, read the steps to choose legal accounting software before you narrow this list.

TL;DR: CosmoLex is the option with published list prices. Actionstep is the option with a quote, a North America-only accounting module and more add-on modules to scope.

Key Takeaways

• CosmoLex lists three per-user plans on its pricing page. Actionstep publishes no dollar figures and describes its price as per user plus implementation fees.

• Actionstep's Legal Accounting module is only available in North America, according to its own pricing page. Check this first if you practice elsewhere.

• CosmoLex sits inside ProfitSolv. Actionstep bought Soluno in 2023 and has said it plans to merge the two.

• No official CosmoLex developer API documentation turned up. Actionstep publishes a developer portal with more than 30 endpoint resources.

• A third-party tracker lists higher CosmoLex prices than the vendor's page does, so get written quotes before you budget.

How we evaluated these tools

This is an informed buyer's guide built from public pages checked in October 2026. No hands-on trials were run, and review-site star ratings are left out because the review pages we tried did not load. The weights below reflect what an owner or operations lead at a small or midsize legal business usually decides on first. They are a judgment call, not vendor data.

Legal accounting carries the largest weight because a platform that cannot produce a clean trust reconciliation creates compliance work, not just inconvenience.

Feature matrix for the decisions that matter

The matrix uses only what the pages checked actually show. A "not verified" cell means public information was not available to this guide, not that the feature is missing.

Two gaps matter most. No vendor page we could open documents Actionstep's trust-accounting features, so that row stays unverified. For CosmoLex, its resource center explains the three-way report: it compares the adjusted bank balance, the book balance and the client trust ledger balance, and all three should match. Ask Actionstep for an equivalent description before you compare the two.

Pricing: what is published and what is not

Pricing checked October 19, 2026.

CosmoLex list prices: $49, $99 and $129 per user per month according to CosmoLex (2026). Each plan carries a "Try for free" button. The page shows a banner reading "Save $120 per user with yearly," but it does not say which billing basis the listed prices reflect.

Actionstep publishes no dollar figures. Its pricing page describes its model as "Priced per user plus implementation fees" and sends buyers to "Request Pricing" under each plan and module, according to Actionstep (2026).

Third-party trackers disagree with the vendor's own page. CostBench lists higher per-user figures for CosmoLex, and its own "last verified" dates do not match each other, according to CostBench (2026). That is why this guide uses only the vendor's page for CosmoLex prices.

Illustrative scenario, not a quote: a 10-user firm that picks CosmoLex's Core plan at the $99 list price would pay $990 a month, or $11,880 over 12 months, before tax and add-ons (10 × $99 × 12). The yearly banner's $120 per user would come to $1,200 across those 10 seats, but the page does not say whether the $99 already assumes annual billing, so the firm should ask. The same 10 seats on Actionstep would start with a written quote that includes implementation fees.

Published figures behind the comparison

Each figure below is cited where it first appears in the article.

The ProfitSolv figure describes the parent company's whole business, not CosmoLex alone. The Actionstep customer figure dates from 2023, so ask for a current count if it matters to your decision.

Vendor profiles

CosmoLex

CosmoLex fits a firm that wants a practice and accounting platform in one product, published per-user prices and a trial before buying. Its limitations are an unstated billing basis, unpriced add-ons and no official developer API documentation in the sources checked.

Its support page lists email forwarding from Gmail and Outlook, calendar sync with Google Calendar and Office 365, document access through Box, Dropbox, Google Drive, NetDocuments and OneDrive, and Zapier. Zapier integrations: over 4,000 applications according to CosmoLex (2022). That page was last updated in September 2022, so confirm each connector before you rely on it.

For implementation, the pricing page describes "live onboarding training with guided data migration" but does not state a separate fee.

Actionstep

Actionstep fits a midsize firm that wants a modular platform: Practice Management and Legal Accounting, plus add-on modules for document automation (Builder), data capture (Capture), AI time capture (Trace) and embedded analytics (Acumen). Its limitations are no list prices, a Legal Accounting module limited to North America, and implementation through certified partners.

Its developer portal lists more than 30 endpoint resources, from actions for matters to bills and timeentries, according to Actionstep (undated docs page). If you plan to compare Actionstep with another platform on the same shortlist, see the Actionstep and Filevine breakdown for midsized litigation firms.

Worked example, illustrative and not a quote: suppose a firm wants to pull 1,000 time records through the timeentries resource for a month-end review. Actionstep's API documentation describes a default page size of 50 and a maximum of 200, set with pageSize, so the default needs 20 requests (1,000 ÷ 50) and the maximum needs 5 (1,000 ÷ 200). Filters use operator suffixes, such as billableAmount_gt in /api/rest/timeentries?billableAmount_gt=5000, so a script can narrow the pull before paging through it. The firm's developer should confirm the exact field names in the portal before building anything on them.

We could not open a vendor page that documents Actionstep's trust features, so check them in a vendor walkthrough before you decide.

Who this is for

Choose CosmoLex if you want published per-user prices, a free trial to test before buying, and a built-in accounting module you can reconcile yourself. Choose Actionstep if you expect to add document automation, time capture or analytics and can budget for a quote and implementation fees.

CosmoLex fits less well for firms that want to build automation around the platform or fix a total cost up front. Red flags: you need a documented developer API before you start, you must lock a total budget that includes add-ons, or you need the billing basis confirmed in writing first.

Actionstep fits less well for firms that want a simple, predictable purchase. Red flags: you practice outside North America and need its Legal Accounting module, you cannot take on quote-based pricing or implementation fees, or you need a price before any sales conversation.

Decision checklist

• Confirm which accounting module you would buy and whether it produces the trust reports your jurisdiction requires.

• Ask CosmoLex in writing whether the Core price assumes monthly or annual billing.

• Ask Actionstep for a written per-user quote that includes implementation fees and every add-on you need.

• Confirm the API or export path before you plan any automation, since it decides what can be connected.

• Reconcile a month of your own trust data during any trial or walkthrough before you sign.

Glossary

• Matter: The client case or file that time, expenses and documents attach to.

• Trust account (IOLTA): The account that holds client money separate from firm money.

• Three-way reconciliation: A comparison of the adjusted bank balance, the book balance and the client trust ledger, where all three should match.

• Legal accounting: Accounting that tracks client trust money and firm operating money together.

• Implementation partner: An outside firm that configures and migrates the platform for you.

• Endpoint resource: A named data object, such as actions, that an API lets you read or change.

• Zapier: A service that connects other apps through triggers and actions without custom code.

Where a proposed workflow fits, and where a simpler tool wins

A proposed workflow from US Tech Automations for an Actionstep firm would start when an intake form is submitted on the firm's website. The flow would check the new contact against the firm's conflict list, create the matter-participant record through the vendor's API, and write a review task for the responsible attorney that shows the conflict result. Prerequisites are API credentials issued by the vendor, confirmed access to the actionparticipants and actions resources, and a conflict list the firm maintains. Human review: an attorney clears every conflict before the matter opens. This is a configurable design, not a deployed one. Firms that also want help drafting the client-facing emails and intake notices that such a flow produces can compare options in the roundup of AI writing tools, though every draft still needs attorney review before it goes out to a client or a prospective client.

A second proposed workflow for a CosmoLex firm would run once a month, after the books close. The trigger is the month-end date. The action is to export the trust ledger and bank statement figures, compare the bank balance, book balance and client ledger totals, and flag any mismatch. The output is an exception list for the bookkeeper, with no entries posted automatically. Prerequisites are a confirmed export or connector route, because no official developer documentation turned up. Human review: the responsible attorney signs off on every flagged difference, and the workflow moves no money.

Zapier, Make and n8n can run the same two flows. Configured well, they provide run histories, retries and error branches, and they can keep an audit trail. The buyer still designs and owns the parts that tend to break: idempotency so a retry does not create a duplicate matter, escalation when a step fails, access controls for client data, and maintenance when either vendor changes a field. A US Tech Automations build would configure those controls up front, but the firm still has to review them.

When NOT to use US Tech Automations. Skip an automation layer if the vendor's built-in billing and trust tools already cover the work, because a second system adds review burden. Skip it if one simple Zapier step, such as a form that creates a contact, is enough and nobody needs error handling. Skip it if the vendor offers no API or export path, because no flow can read your data without one, and the process should be fixed first.

Frequently asked questions

Is CosmoLex the same company as Actionstep?

No. CosmoLex is a ProfitSolv brand, and Actionstep is a separate company that bought the Soluno legal accounting product in 2023.

Which one publishes prices?

CosmoLex publishes three per-user list prices, while Actionstep publishes none and quotes per user plus implementation fees.

Does CosmoLex offer a public API?

No official developer API documentation turned up in the sources checked, so ask CosmoLex in writing before you plan any custom integration.

Is Actionstep's legal accounting module available outside North America?

No. Its pricing page says Legal Accounting is only available in North America.

Should I trust third-party price trackers?

Not without checking, because one tracker reports higher CosmoLex figures than the vendor's own page and its own dates conflict.

Conclusion

The category decision comes down to this: CosmoLex if you need published per-user prices and a trial before you buy, and Actionstep if you are a midsize firm ready for a quote, an implementation partner and add-on scope. Before either contract, get written pricing, confirm the billing basis, and confirm the API or export path any automation depends on. To see how a configured design would handle those steps, see how US Tech Automations configures this.