lexV

Source-grounded regulatory intelligence

Compare regulatory requirements. Trace every finding.

LexV helps legal, compliance, and policy teams compare regulations across jurisdictions and versions, surface potential gaps and conflicts, and inspect the source passage behind each finding.

Discuss a paid pilot →See an example

CAD $1,250 fixedUp to 250 source pagesRequirements matrix and findings memo

How it works

From documents to insights in three steps

01

Upload or link your documents

Drop in PDFs, paste text, or link directly to public legal and regulatory sources.

02

lexV analyzes and aligns

Our engine understands legal structure—clauses, sections, definitions—and aligns comparable content across documents.

03

Review a precise diff

See a clean, clause-level comparison with material changes highlighted and a plain-language summary of what changed.

Public analysis

A change in dates can change the answer.

A source-linked comparison of the 2026 Section 338 actions concerning products of Canada, verified against the public instruments.

Verified public analysisVerified September 10, 2026

Section 338 Canada tariffs: dates, scope, and changes

The July proclamations named August 19 as the start of additional 50% duties. A three-day suspension moved the actual start to August 22, and September actions add another set of scope and timing changes.

Supported finding50% duties are additional under the operative text.
Professional reviewProduct treatment cannot be inferred from a July list alone.
Read the analysis and inspect the sources

The lexV platform

From document sets to inspectable requirements.

The paid pilot is an entry point to the platform. It uses the same ingestion, extraction, comparison, and source-grounded review workflow built for continuing legal and compliance work.

Core capabilities

  • ✓Ingest public, customer-supplied, and licensed regulatory documents
  • ✓Extract provisions while preserving document structure and source context
  • ✓Compare requirements across versions, instruments, and jurisdictions
  • ✓Separate source-supported findings from candidate discrepancies for review
  • ✓Answer questions with the relevant source passage attached

What reviewers receive

Every result is tied back to the document, provision, and relevant version. A supported finding is presented differently from a possible gap or conflict that still needs professional judgment.

The objective is a reviewable work product—not an unexplained answer.