Aurum

Name: Aurum
Brand: Aurum

Tecnologia para a próxima forma de advogar.

Est 1993|Valuation $100M|Raised $12M|12 Ref Customers

LinkedIn 58K|Web traffic 227K|FTEs 337|HQ Florianópolis, Santa Catarina, BR

MarketsMatter Management Legal Case Management

Published Sep 28, 2026

01Common complaints

- Practices that require comprehensive handling of "segredo de justiça" monitoring - Multiple user reports cite limitations in monitoring secret-justice cases within the platform. - Environments that require highly predictable, low-maintenance tribunal linkage - Some user reports describe repeated case-linking failures and time spent re-linking, reducing automation benefits in those contexts. - Highly price-sensitive solo or early-career practices - Community discussions indicate some segments perceive the product as relatively expensive; lower-cost or simpler tools may better match very constrained budgets. - Buyers requiring publicly available enterprise security attestations before procurement - SOC 2 / ISO 27001 documentation was not located in the reviewed sources; formal security questionnaires and evidence requests will be necessary for enterprise procurement. - Tribunal-dependent data capture - The product's capture capability is dependent on tribunal data exposure and on user-provided credentials, which can limit automation in some scenarios. - Secret-justice case monitoring constraints - Users have reported limitations in tracking cases under secrecy regimes. - Cloud dependency / internet required - As a cloud-based SaaS, offline functionality is limited; this is a consideration for environments with unreliable connectivity. - Contracting / renewal friction risk (anecdotal) - Some user reports describe disputes related to renewal and cancellation; prospective buyers should review contract clauses and test support responsiveness during evaluation.

Deal disqualifiers: what makes a poor fit

Practices requiring comprehensive in-tool monitoring of secret-justice cases.
Organizations with low tolerance for occasional tribunal linkage issues and manual remediation.
Buyers requiring public SOC 2 / ISO 27001 documentation prior to procurement without engaging the vendor in a security review process.

02Why they buy

- Two-product strategy aligned to firm scale - Product segmentation: Astrea aimed at smaller firms and Themis aimed at larger operations. - Brazil-localized workflows and communication features - Features include integrations to local communication channels (e.g., WhatsApp workflows) and a client portal designed for local usage patterns. - Established presence in the Brazilian legal-tech market - The 2019 acquisition by a larger software group and continued product activity indicate sustained vendor operations and investments; buyers should evaluate product fit beyond company stability indicators. - Where competitors have advantages - Global platforms typically offer broader integrations, larger volumes of independently verifiable reviews, and more documented admin/security features; local vendors may provide stronger alignment with Brazil-specific court and publication capture.

03Field reports

Important scope note - "Aurum" is a name used by multiple unrelated organizations. This report focuses on Aurum Software (vendor website) and its products Astrea and Themis. - Review platforms and balanced quotes - B2B Stack (Brazilian software review platform) - Positive sentiment example - A reviewer described benefits related to process/deadline control and financial controls, characterizing the product as a useful tool for their context. - Negative / improvement point example - The same reviewer noted an inability to track processes under "segredo de justiça" as a limitation. - Apple App Store reviews (end-user mobile experience) - Negative experience (user-reported) - A reviewer reported recurring case-linking errors, time spent re-linking cases, and a dispute over renewal/cancellation fees; the reviewer concluded the experience did not meet expectations in that context. - Vendor response context - Vendor responses attribute some capture limits to tribunal data availability and to permission/credential requirements for certain queries. - Capterra (marketplace) - Limited sample size; ratings appear based on very small numbers of reviews and should not be treated as representative without further verification. - Common "why chosen" themes (from testimonials and user discussions) - Automation of process monitoring and publication alerts, deadline notifications, and centralization of tasks/agenda are recurring value drivers cited by users. - Some users select Astrea for moderate process volumes and consider Themis when scaling to larger volumes. - Why some customers left / churn reasons (from reviews and discussions) - Cost sensitivity - Some users cite cost as a factor in switching away from the product; vendor-selected testimonials indicate some customers return after switching, but these are vendor-curated. - Reliability/friction in court linkage and capture workflows - User reports indicate repeated linking failures and ongoing maintenance burdens in some tribunal environments. - Limited coverage for secret-justice cases - Reported by reviewers as a gap in monitoring capabilities. - Deal-breakers and reasons customers did not purchase (inferred) - Practices that require comprehensive monitoring of secret-justice cases may find the product unsuitable. - Environments that require seamless OAB-based bulk capture without court credential overhead may encounter limitations.

Vendor-published customer stories

The vendor publishes customer stories describing use cases such as adapting operations for remote work or crisis periods. These narratives illustrate workflows but are vendor-curated and not independent evaluations.

Quantified metrics and methodology concerns

The vendor publishes quantitative claims (e.g., large-scale automation counts, reported efficiency gains, aggregate satisfaction metrics). These claims are notable but lack independent methodological detail in the sources reviewed. Procurement teams should request substantiation (study design, baselines, sample sizes) for any claim intended to inform contractual commitments.

Mixed results

Public review evidence includes both positive and strongly negative experiences; some environments reported substantial friction that reduced the expected benefit of automation.

04Best fit

Company sizes

Astrea
- Solo attorneys and very small to small firms (solo to small group practices) that require a centralized system for deadlines, process updates, task delegation, and basic finance.
Themis
- Larger firms and corporate legal departments that need custom reporting and deeper operational controls.

Industries and verticals

Primary vertical: legal services (law firms) and in-house legal departments operating in Brazil.

Roles and personas

Decision makers
- Firm partners / managing partners
- Legal operations managers in larger organizations
- Administrative/finance leads within law firms
End users
- Attorneys
- Paralegals / assistants
- Intake and client service staff

Pain points the product addresses

Fragmented deadline tracking and missed deadlines
Manual monitoring of court websites and official publications
High volume of client status inquiries via messaging apps
Limited operational visibility across processes and tasks

Qualification criteria: what makes a good fit

Practices that will centralize processes, tasks, and deadlines into a single system and that can provide the necessary tribunal credentials to enable full capture functionality.

05The pitch

What the product does (core value proposition in objective terms)

- Aurum is a Brazilian legal-technology vendor offering two primary products: - Astrea: a cloud-based practice management system intended to automate routine administrative and case-tracking tasks for solo attorneys and small-to-mid law firms (process monitoring, deadlines, tasks, agenda, client portal, documents, financial controls, communications). - Themis: a system targeted at larger law firms and corporate legal departments, with emphasis on customizable reporting, operational controls, and financial management. - Aurum positions its products around workflow centralization and integrated AI features for triaging court updates/publications, assisting with drafting, and providing simplified explanations of legal information for clients.

Target market and market positioning

- Astrea - Target: solo attorneys and small-to-mid firms requiring process/publication capture, deadline control, internal task management, and basic financial routines. - Themis - Target: larger operations (large firms, legal departments) that require customizable reporting, more extensive financial and contract controls, and operational metrics. - Market stance - Aurum presents itself as a specialist in legal software for the Brazilian market, with vendor-reported user counts and automation-related capabilities.

Get a comprehensive analysis of Aurum including market position, competitive landscape, adoption trends, and peer benchmarks.

Download full report →