Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Microsoft Purview eDiscovery vs kCura Relativity comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 6, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

kCura Relativity
Ranking in eDiscovery
4th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
8.1
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Microsoft Purview eDiscovery
Ranking in eDiscovery
1st
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
Microsoft Security Suite (22nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the eDiscovery category, the mindshare of kCura Relativity is 5.6%, up from 5.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Microsoft Purview eDiscovery is 10.7%, down from 26.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
eDiscovery Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Microsoft Purview eDiscovery10.7%
kCura Relativity5.6%
Other83.7%
eDiscovery
 

Featured Reviews

HR
Legal Associate at Elevate
Easy to categorize documents and offers transparent view of documents
I found Relativity very useful because it's easy to categorize documents. If you get more complex litigation, like around 500,000 or 1,000,000 documents, it's easier to categorize them in Relativity. So, it's a more powerful tool for reviewing documents. I haven't faced any problems using Relativity yet. I found it very useful.
reviewer2595618 - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior System Engineer at a sports company with 5,001-10,000 employees
Has made it significantly easier to handle rare litigation requests
The speed of it is valuable. I am able to search even 10,000 mailboxes for specific content. It helps search and accommodate the often limited information provided by users regarding what they need. It provides a solid starting point, and then we are able to refine the data from there. That has been very helpful because we do not always get enough information from our users to know what to look for. For example, a user is missing an email from x date but does not know anything else. In such a case, I give them a list of emails to look at so that they can tell me what they are missing. It is not a lack of the tool. It is more of a lack of the user providing info.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"Caplets are a very good technical feature."
"The initial setup was relatively straightforward."
"kCura Relativity is easy to use, and it is reliable."
"I like Relativity's blackout feature, as well as the Case Dynamics function."
"There are a lot of ways to QC your work and save your searches, and we had really good case support from the Relativity team."
"It is easy for a beginner to learn to use Relativity."
"The ease of navigation from dock to dock, and that kind of usability, is quite helpful."
"Tasks that took an entire day before we implemented Purview now take just 30 minutes."
"The machine learning wasn't half bad. I really like that part. I thought it was novel. It pretty much automated it, once you trained the model."
"Microsoft Purview eDiscovery has saved me personally a lot of time because I can query it, and it touches everything we have as a full Microsoft shop."
"Our legal team benefits from using Microsoft Purview eDiscovery."
"I think eDiscovery Premium has made dealing with data from Teams much more accessible than any other platform."
"The most valuable feature of Microsoft Purview eDiscovery is its ability to search across various platforms, including Exchange, SharePoint, Teams, and OneDrive. It enables a streamlined, unified process for searching across these platforms."
"The tool has been beneficial. Some of our previous users left the organization without sharing the information they had at a personal level. This information was related to the organization, and they didn't disclose it. Thanks to the product, it's easy for me to search and find out what communication a specific user has done, whether it's from SharePoint or any other platform. With Microsoft Purview eDiscovery, we can easily retrieve and restore this data."
"The speed of it is valuable. I am able to search even 10,000 mailboxes for specific content. It helps search and accommodate the often limited information provided by users regarding what they need."
 

Cons

"They require more built-in support for some third-party applications."
"The platform's integration of advanced AI features could further enhance its capabilities."
"There are a lot of bugs on the development side."
"I would definitely not recommended it unless you have someone who has had experience with it and knows how to work the program."
"The price per user could be improved. We'd like for it to be more affordable."
"What I dislike about Relativity is that we have to go through the host in order to do productions and loads. It is not a do-it-yourself tool."
"I haven't seen anything on AI merging with Relativity."
"I see two significant challenges with many of my clients. One is that there are some functionality gaps compared to specialized tools in the legal industry, like a legal hold tool or a document review tool. They have features that Purview eDiscovery lacks. Those gaps create a situation where I almost have to do things twice. I need to collect all my data in eDiscovery and ship it to another platform to complete the review."
"Purview Data Loss Protection for remediating policy violations needs refinement, for example, in defining what constitutes a credit card because that is where I get the most false positives."
"I would suggest adding more platforms. Currently, it's compatible with OneDrive, Teams, SharePoint, and Exchange. Adding more features, as Microsoft continues to expand their cloud offerings, would be beneficial. Exploring options like Azure Files might be an avenue for improvement."
"Purview eDiscovery works, but it's not entirely perfect. There were times when search results would get hung up or error codes would be presented and we'd have to contact Microsoft to get that sorted out."
"I would suggest adding more platforms."
"It has been one of the most solid tools I have worked with. However, Purview Data Loss Protection for remediating policy violations needs refinement, for example, in defining what constitutes a credit card because that is where I get the most false positives."
"We find that many critical functions are available only to E5 license holders."
"The sorting and filtering of the result data need improvement, and the interface for writing queries is not user-friendly for business users."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Users are typically charged a fee per user account and a separate fee based on the amount of data processed and hosted."
"It's worth the money."
"They are maintaining the per gigabyte pricing, and it's based on tiers of how much data you host with them."
"The pricing is extremely complicated."
"Microsoft Purview eDiscovery comes as part of Microsoft 365 licenses."
"The pricing and licensing with Microsoft can be complex, and licensing is known to be a challenge because it changes frequently. While the licensing for Purview is not as tricky as other Microsoft products, navigating licenses since the shift to E3 and E5 plans has been a task, as individual licenses must now be purchased separately."
"In the positions that I've had through contracting over the years, I've heard talk of it being overpriced and underperforming compared to its competitors."
"The costs associated with E5 licensing are currently expensive for us, so we use the E3 license, which comes with fewer features and functionalities."
"With the full bundle, pricing is not a significant concern. As an M3, I find the Purview pricing of 1250 per user worthwhile."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which eDiscovery solutions are best for your needs.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Legal Firm
29%
Computer Software Company
9%
Government
9%
Outsourcing Company
5%
Government
13%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Computer Software Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business1
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise2
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business3
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise3
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for kCura Relativity?
It's expensive for an individual, but for a company, it's not expensive. And for an individual, I believe it's of no use.
What needs improvement with kCura Relativity?
I haven't seen anything on AI merging with Relativity.
What is your primary use case for kCura Relativity?
We use Relativity to code documents for their responsiveness, privilege, private information, confidentiality, and so on. We use it to categorize our documents into different categories depending o...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Microsoft Purview eDiscovery?
The setup process was very straightforward. We acquired pricing through our reseller in NASDAQ, eliminating the need to search for prices ourselves.
What needs improvement with Microsoft Purview eDiscovery?
The query language can be time-consuming to figure out if you don't know it initially. While there are options with dropdowns to select criteria, having a natural language feature would be benefici...
What is your primary use case for Microsoft Purview eDiscovery?
I sometimes use it for legal holds or to find lost items, and to determine what is going on. However, most of the time, my use case is legal-related.
 

Also Known As

Relativity
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Webb & Tyler
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft Purview eDiscovery vs. kCura Relativity and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.