Sacra estimates that Darrow generated $26 million in revenue in 2024, with the CEO forecasting growth to exceed $50 million in 2025 and reach $120 million by 2026. The company has been cash-flow positive since 2023.

The revenue model combines traditional SaaS subscriptions with usage-based fees, charging law firms between tens of thousands and millions of dollars annually based on firm size and case volume. Darrow serves 80 law firms with 3,000 individual lawyers active on the platform as of early 2025, compared to 70 firms in late 2024. The company has facilitated over $15 billion in active litigation value and connected more than 100,000 plaintiffs to legal cases.

One revenue source stems from Darrow's fee-sharing arrangement through partnerships with Arizona-based lawyers, allowing the company to take a percentage of attorney fees when cases originating from their platform result in settlements or judgments. This creates a dual revenue stream beyond traditional software licensing.

Darrow raised $35 million in a Series B round in September 2023, bringing total funding to approximately $60 million. The round was led by Georgian Partners, with participation from existing investors F2 Venture Capital, Entrée Capital, NFX, and Y Combinator.

Early investor Barak Rabinowitz of F2 Venture Capital holds a stake exceeding 10% in the company. The funding has enabled Darrow to expand operations from its Israeli headquarters to the US legal market, where class action litigation represents a larger addressable market compared to most other jurisdictions.

Darrow is an AI-powered legal intelligence platform that identifies potential class action lawsuits by scanning the internet for corporate violations and regulatory breaches.

The system integrates proprietary machine learning models with foundational models from OpenAI and Anthropic to process millions of data points, including news articles, social media posts, SEC filings, court dockets, consumer complaints, and company privacy policies.

The platform's primary feature is the Darrow Portal, a dashboard where lawyers can view potential cases ranked by metrics such as strength of claim, estimated damages, class size, and probability of success.

Each case includes a detailed memo with legal analysis, governing law, key exhibits, and a damages model. Lawyers can secure exclusivity on cases of interest with a single click.

The Torch browser extension provides real-time legal analysis as users navigate websites, enabling the detection of potential violations across the open internet.

PlaintiffLink manages the plaintiff acquisition process through targeted digital advertising and AI-driven vetting, connecting law firms with potential class members or mass arbitration claimants. The platform supports scaling from identifying individual representative plaintiffs to onboarding tens of thousands of claimants for mass arbitration cases.

Darrow operates a B2B model serving plaintiff-side law firms through a combination of SaaS subscriptions, usage-based fees, and contingency-based revenue sharing.

The company charges law firms monthly per-lawyer fees ranging from $500 to $1,000, with additional fees for case exclusivity and plaintiff acquisition services provided through PlaintiffLink.

A key component of Darrow's business model is its fee-sharing arrangement, made possible by Arizona's 2020 regulatory changes permitting non-lawyers to share in attorney fees. Darrow collaborates with Arizona lawyer Don Bivens, who acts as co-counsel on cases originating from the platform and allocates a portion of his attorney fees to Darrow.

This structure establishes a success-based revenue stream tied directly to case outcomes.

The model incorporates AI to significantly lower the upfront research costs that typically make class action discovery expensive for law firms.

By automating violation detection and delivering ready-to-file case packages, Darrow shifts what has traditionally been a high-cost, high-risk business development process into a more predictable and scalable operation. The company's 156-person team includes numerous technologists with legal training, combining expertise in AI development and legal analysis.

Direct competition includes AI-first startups targeting plaintiff-side law firms with similar automation strategies. Supio raised $25 million in 2024 to develop end-to-end personal injury and mass tort workflows, competing on the breadth of case management capabilities beyond discovery.

Eve, backed by Andreessen Horowitz, provides a system encompassing intake, triage, and damages modeling, designed for continuous usage rather than Darrow's event-triggered model. EvenUp, valued at over $1 billion, focuses on personal injury demand letter automation and is expanding into case preparation tools that may overlap with Darrow's plaintiff acquisition services.

Justpoint addresses a similar problem by using AI to analyze medical records for pharmaceutical mass tort opportunities, differing from Darrow's emphasis on class actions. The company operates its own Arizona-based law firm to capture attorney fees directly, bypassing the partnership model used by Darrow.

Thomson Reuters and LexisNexis are integrating generative AI into their research platforms, potentially bundling Darrow-like analytics into existing Westlaw and Lexis subscriptions.

These incumbents maintain strong procurement relationships with large law firms and could leverage their extensive legal databases to compete in violation detection services. However, adapting legacy systems and sales processes to serve the plaintiff bar, a historically smaller market segment, presents a challenge.

Pattern Data and other boutique analytics firms compete on specific components of Darrow's workflow, particularly in medical record analysis and settlement modeling for mass torts.

These smaller competitors often underprice Darrow on targeted use cases, appealing to cost-conscious firms seeking specialized solutions rather than comprehensive platforms.

Darrow is expanding from traditional class actions into mass arbitration, where the American Arbitration Association processed 280,000 cases in 2024, a five-fold increase over two years.

The PlaintiffLink platform now facilitates the vetting and onboarding of tens of thousands of claimants for arbitration cases, which often result in higher per-claimant payouts compared to class action settlements. The company is also extending its violation detection algorithms to include antitrust, medical device defects, and ESG-related greenwashing claims.

The planned Enterprise Module represents a potential TAM expansion, enabling Darrow to offer violation detection services to corporations aiming to identify legal vulnerabilities before plaintiff attorneys do. Fortune 1000 legal departments face growing pressure to manage collective action risks proactively, particularly under new arbitration rules.

This reverse-alert system could be priced on a per-seat or per-entity basis, creating a SaaS revenue stream targeting corporate buyers.

The European implementation of collective redress mechanisms by 2025 introduces the first major international TAM for class action-style litigation outside the US. For example, Germany now permits broad civil claims through opt-in redress actions, while qualified entities across 27 EU member states can initiate continent-wide representative actions.

Darrow's AI models could be localized for specific languages and legal systems, potentially through partnerships with regional law firms or licensing agreements with local legal tech providers.

Regulatory backlash: Darrow's fee-sharing model operates within a legal gray area that may attract regulatory scrutiny as the practice scales. Although permitted in Arizona and a limited number of other jurisdictions, the arrangement violates ethical rules in 47 states. This could prompt challenges from bar associations or lead to legislative restrictions, potentially eliminating a key revenue stream and competitive advantage.

AI commoditization: The increasing capabilities and accessibility of large language models are lowering the technical barriers to developing competing legal intelligence platforms. Established legal research providers or new entrants could replicate Darrow's violation detection capabilities, which may erode its differentiation, exert downward pressure on pricing, and reduce market share.

Market saturation: The plaintiff bar constitutes a relatively concentrated customer base. As more AI-driven case discovery tools enter the market, competition for identifying high-value violations is likely to intensify. If multiple platforms uncover the same corporate misconduct simultaneously, this could result in racing dynamics that diminish case values and create disputes over case ownership and exclusivity.