Soluno was built by Canadian lawyers for Canadian legal accounting. That foundation is real and we respect it. But Soluno's UX, AI, onboarding speed, client tools, and pricing transparency reflect a product that hasn't kept pace with what modern small firms need.
Soluno's trust accounting was built by people who had spent years working inside Canadian law firms. The LSO, LSBC, and LSA compliance depth is genuine — not adapted from another jurisdiction like many competitors.
Soluno was built to be the modern replacement for PCLaw — same depth of legal accounting, cloud-based architecture. For PCLaw users who need to migrate, Soluno is a familiar path. JuriOS is also that path, with a more modern finish.
Like JuriOS, Soluno has a full native general ledger. No QuickBooks dependency. This is the correct architecture for Canadian firms — and Soluno was one of the first to build it this way.
"The trust accounting in Soluno is solid. But I was doing everything else — client communication, document sharing, invoice follow-up — in four different apps outside of it. That's not a practice management system. That's an accounting system with a billing module."
Soluno has no AI time capture, no intelligent document drafting, no predictive conflict detection. In 2025, AI time capture alone recovers 1.4 billable hours per lawyer per day. The absence of AI in Soluno is not a minor gap — it's a compounding revenue loss for every lawyer on the platform, every day.
Soluno improved on PCLaw's interface but inherited its DNA. Dense navigation, accounting-centric workflows, and a visual language that feels like enterprise software from five years ago. New staff take time to get productive. The interface doesn't disappear into the background the way modern software should.
Soluno has no client portal, no secure document sharing, no online invoice payment, no digital intake forms. Client communication happens entirely outside the software. Modern clients in real estate, family law, and immigration increasingly expect digital-first service that Soluno cannot support.
Soluno's mobile experience is a web interface, not a purpose-built app. A lawyer leaving court can technically access it from a phone — but the experience is not designed for mobile workflows. Logging time, reviewing a matter, or processing a trust receipt from a phone is painful enough that most lawyers don't bother.
Soluno's onboarding typically involves configuration sessions and structured training before staff are productive. This is time the firm pays for in lost productivity. JuriOS firms are billing within 30 minutes of signup — not 30 days.
Soluno does not publish pricing publicly. You contact sales, go through a discovery process, and receive a quote. This immediately signals a negotiated, opaque pricing model. JuriOS publishes every price publicly — $69, $149, or $249/month. What you see is what you pay.
Where trust accounting is equal, we mark it honestly. The differences accumulate quickly in everything built on top of that foundation.
Both platforms have solid Canadian trust accounting. The difference is what happens around it — how much of the reconciliation work is automated, how accessible it is from anywhere, and how effortlessly it generates Law Society reports.
Based on user reports and industry data, Soluno typically costs more per seat than JuriOS — and requires a discovery call before you even see a number. Here's what we know.
Soluno's trust accounting is genuinely good — I won't say otherwise. But every time I wanted to do something modern — send a client a document securely, take payment online, let my paralegal log time from her phone — I was doing it in a separate app. I switched to JuriOS and that list of separate apps went away. The trust accounting is just as solid and the rest of the system actually works for how I practice in 2025.
30-day free trial. No credit card. Migration from Soluno included on every plan. The same Canadian trust accounting — with AI, a client portal, a real mobile app, and transparent pricing.