Contract lifecycle management
Your contracts, on your infrastructure
A complete CLM — clause-level templates, redlines, approvals, signature, obligations — running entirely inside your own environment. Open source under AGPLv3, air-gap capable, with no telemetry.
AGPLv3 · Self-hostable · No phone-home
git clone https://github.com/wraft/wraft
cd wraft && docker compose up
# Postgres + MinIO + Wraft, on your machine.
# No account. No licence key. No outbound calls.Why teams look for an alternative
Cloud CLM asks you to store your most sensitive agreements somewhere you cannot see
For most companies that trade-off is acceptable. For regulated, sovereign, and security-reviewed environments it is the reason the category gets rejected in procurement.
Your contracts sit on shared infrastructure
Multi-tenant by design. Your counterparty terms, pricing, and settlements live in the same database as everyone else's, on hardware you cannot inspect or audit.
Data residency is a pricing tier
Where your contracts are stored becomes a commercial negotiation rather than an architectural fact. Regions you need may simply not be offered.
The exit is the product
Export gives you PDFs, not structure. Templates, clause libraries, approval history and metadata stay behind, so migrating means rebuilding.
The full lifecycle
Not a document generator with a contracts label
Every stage a CLM is expected to cover, in one system, with each handoff recorded against the revision that triggered it.
What it does
Category table stakes, met properly
Being open source is not a substitute for being a capable CLM. These are the functions a legal team will check for before anything on this page matters.
Clause-level templates
Assemble agreements from an approved clause library. Legal owns the language; the template owns the layout; nobody edits either to produce a document.
Versioning and redlines
Every revision retained and diffable. Compare any two versions, see who changed which clause, and restore a prior state without leaving the workspace.
Approval flows
Ordered review states with conditional routing on value, counterparty, or clause deviation. Each approval binds to the exact revision it approved.
Built-in e-signature
Send for signature from the document you just generated, not from a second product with a second bill. The signed artifact is immutable and independently verifiable.
Obligations and renewals
Extract dates, values, and commitments into structured fields. Renewal and notice-period alerts fire from the contract itself rather than a parallel spreadsheet.
Searchable repository
Full-text and field-level search across every executed agreement. Answer 'which contracts auto-renew in Q3' as a query, not as a project.
An honest comparison
Where the difference actually is
Compared on things that are matters of fact rather than opinion. Proprietary CLMs are mature, well-supported products — the difference is architectural, not a question of quality.
Written about the common architecture of hosted CLM products, not any single vendor. Individual products differ, and some offer private-cloud or residency options at enterprise tiers — check the specific terms of whatever you are comparing against.
How you run it
Three deployments, one codebase
Self-hosted
Docker Compose or your own orchestration, against your Postgres and your object store. The default, and the one the licence is written for.
Air-gapped
No outbound network required to operate. Suitable for classified, defence, and isolated regulatory environments.
Managed by us
We run it, you keep the exit. Same codebase, same schema — moving to self-hosted later is a migration, not a rewrite.
The part nobody else writes down
Leaving is a feature, and we would rather you knew how
Vendor lock-in is not a slogan you can claim your way out of. Either the exit is real and describable, or it is not. Here is exactly what you keep.
The database
Standard Postgres. Your schema, your backups, your queries — no proprietary encoding to decode.
The files
Plain PDFs in your own S3-compatible store, named and addressable without our software.
The templates
Markdown with LaTeX or Typst typesetting. Readable and portable text, not a binary format.
The software
AGPLv3, public, forkable. If we stop, you keep running and you can keep building.
Who this is for
Teams where the deployment model is the deciding factor
If a hosted CLM already clears your security review, most of this page is irrelevant and you should buy the mature incumbent. These are the cases where it does not.
Healthcare
PHI-adjacent agreements handled under your own BAA posture, with data isolation you can evidence rather than cite.
Financial services
Strict residency and retention obligations met by architecture, not by a vendor's regional roadmap.
Government and defence
Air-gapped deployments for procurement and classified work, with full source available for security review.
Legal teams in-house
A clause library and approval flow that legal owns outright, without a per-seat charge on every reviewer.
Every step is recorded
Answer 'which version did we sign, and who approved it?'
Not by reconstructing an email thread. Each transition is written against the revision that caused it, which is what turns an archive into evidence.
- 01 Draft created Stamped with the template and clause-library versions that produced it.
- 02 Redlines exchanged Every revision retained and diffable against any other.
- 03 Approval granted Bound to the exact revision approved, not to the document in general.
- 04 Signature applied The artifact is sealed, immutable, and independently verifiable.
- 05 Obligations tracked Renewal and notice dates read from the executed contract itself.
Before you commit