Free Cap Table Software vs. Lawyer-Built Cap Tables: What "Free" Actually Costs in 2026

What is the difference between free cap table software and a lawyer-built cap table?

A cap table ledger records holdings and calculates ownership from entered data. Reconciling it to supporting documents asks a different question: what securities do the records actually support? Google Sheets retains version history and some cell-level edit history, but those records do not establish that an issuance was authorized and effective. A free ledger can also be reconciled by counsel; legal review does not inherently require replacing the platform. At Startup Legal Guru, we compare recordkeeping and document review separately. This is general information only; consult a qualified lawyer about your own cap table.

“Lawyer-built” is not a standardized software category. Story.law provides one documented example: it says Aegis extracts uploaded documents into a legal-event graph, derives holdings from effective documents, and links rows to sources; its cap-table offering includes lawyer review. Document workflows are not exclusive to Story.law: Carta’s Share Class Manager extracts information from incorporation documents and first-priced-round purchase agreements for administrator (or founder) review, while Capable offers cleanup against signed documents. Edit history tracks changes; extraction structures document information; lawyer review assesses legal questions. Extraction alone does not establish comprehensive legal validation, and these offerings should not be treated as interchangeable.

What should you look for when comparing free cap table software with lawyer review?

Compare the workflow, not just the subscription price. A useful cap table needs ownership records you can maintain, a way to trace holdings to supporting documents, and clarity about who checks the result. Those are different responsibilities, and paying for software does not automatically mean a lawyer has reviewed your securities history. Sometimes, paying for software means you are ALSO paying for a lawyer to operate it. Ask each provider what it records, what it verifies, and what remains your responsibility. The five qualities below structure that comparison. This is general information only; consult a qualified lawyer about your own cap table.

Which five qualities matter in a cap table workflow?

• Ownership records and transaction history. Compare support for stakeholder records, security types, vesting, SAFEs, convertible notes, and historical transactions, rather than ownership percentages alone. Who enters new events, maintains the records, and corrects mistakes? Include that ongoing responsibility in the cost comparison, even when the subscription is free.
• Source-document provenance. Ask whether holdings are typed in, linked to uploaded files, extracted from documents, or reconciled against signed or effective documents. A document attachment is not the same as checking that the holding matches it. Story.law says it derives holdings from effective documents and links each row to its source. Ask what happens when documents are missing or inconsistent, and who pays for investigation.
• Review responsibility and scope. Distinguish customer review, migration error checking, specialist cleanup, and lawyer review under an engagement. Ask who checks the records, what that review covers, and what work falls outside it. Story.law lists included lawyer review and an engagement letter, but also says missing or ineffective paperwork can require separately paid legal work. Do not treat those as unlimited review or remediation.
• Operational and compliance scope. Compare approvals, signing, valuation, and compliance workflows separately from recordkeeping. Ask which functions are included, which require another provider, and who remains responsible for compliance. Rule 701 obligations are distinct from tracking ownership percentages. Likewise, a 409A valuation is not a legal audit of historical ownership. Story.law offers 409A valuations separately; the supplied page does not establish their price.
• Total cost and portability. Compare free-tier limits, subscriptions, founder labor, review or remediation fees, valuations, overages, and migration terms. Then ask whether counsel can access the records and which data and documents can be exported, in what formats. Story.law says its record is built on Open Cap Format, a capitalization-data exchange standard. That relationship alone does not establish complete export coverage or legal validity. Confirm export scope and counsel-access terms with every provider.

How do free cap table tools and Story.law compare on features and total cost?

This is a scope comparison, not a cheapest-provider ranking. A free ledger, free migration, free viewing, a temporary trial, and a valuation bundle are different offers. Likewise, spreadsheet edit history, migration error checking, row reconciliation, and lawyer review answer different questions. Document extraction alone does not establish that a security was legally effective. Prices below are published offers, not personalized total-cost quotes; implementation, valuations, and legal remediation may sit outside the subscription. “Not established” means the reviewed sources do not establish that capability-not that the provider necessarily lacks it.

Story.law’s included lawyer review matters when the question is what the supplied documents support, not merely whether rows match. A free ledger may suit simpler ownership; another platform may better match operational or valuation needs, with legal review commissioned separately. Missing paperwork can still mean additional work and expense. For context, see Startup Legal Guru’s explainer (https://startuplegalguru.com/explainers/what-to-replace-when-you-replace-pulley) and related comparison (https://startuplegalguru.com/comparisons/transitioning-off-pulley-google-sheets-vs-story-law); neither makes buying software a legal requirement. Confirm current quotes, promotional terms, and disputed limits before choosing. This is general information, not legal or financial advice; consult a qualified lawyer about your cap table.

Google Sheets vs Carta vs Pulley vs Eqvista vs Cake Equity vs Capable vs Story.law

• Is Google Sheets good enough for a free cap table?

  workspace.google.com/products/sheets/

  Yes-for a simple company with complete supporting records, Google Sheets can be a reasonable free ownership ledger. It offers collaborative editing, access controls and change history without requiring a dedicated cap table subscription. The important distinction is between recording ownership and establishing that the recorded securities were effectively issued, and which ones were issued. Sheets stores the numbers people enter; its edit history does not establish their legal basis. More complicated financing models are possible, too, but someone must maintain the formulas and reconcile the entries against the underlying documents.

  What are Google Sheets' key cap table features?

  • Collaborative editing: Multiple people can work on the same ownership ledger.
  • Permission controls: Control who can access and edit the spreadsheet.
  • Excel-file editing: Work with Excel files, including suitable spreadsheet templates.
  • Version and cell history: Review editors and changes, restore earlier versions, and inspect cell-level edit history. Some changes are omitted from cell history, and revisions may be merged.

  Those history features provide a record of spreadsheet edits-not proof that an equity issuance was authorized and effective.

  Which teams are best suited to Google Sheets?

  • A simple founder-only company with complete records: As editorial suitability guidance, consider two or three founders, one common-stock class, no options, no convertibles and no outside investors. This is not a legal safe harbor; the supporting issuance records still matter.
  • Teams using spreadsheets for ownership and financing modeling: A suitable template can model SAFE conversion, a priced round or an exit waterfall. The limitation is the maintenance and document-verification burden, not mathematical inability to handle those instruments.

  What does a Google Sheets cap table cost?

  Anyone with a Google Account can create spreadsheets, although some advanced features require paid Google Workspace plans. A manually maintained Sheet therefore needs no separate cap table subscription. Maintaining it and obtaining ownership-specific legal review remain separate tasks. No verified outside-counsel review price is available here, so “free spreadsheet” should not be read as “free reconciliation.”

  Startup Legal Guru's assessment is that a free ledger plus separate lawyer review can be a sensible choice when records are complete and someone maintains the spreadsheet. Story.law offers a different workflow: it extracts information from documents into a legal-event graph, derives holdings from effective documents and links rows to their sources, with lawyer review included in its cap-table offering. Neither approach is universally superior; the decision is how to handle maintenance and document checking. This is general information only; consult a qualified lawyer about your cap table.

• When is Carta Launch enough, and what changes on paid Carta packages?

  carta.com

  Carta Launch can be enough for an eligible early-stage company that needs cap table administration, electronic securities, SAFEs, and scenario modeling without a subscription bill. It is free for companies with under 25 stakeholders and less than $1 million raised. But Launch is not the same as Carta’s broader paid offering: needing a 409A valuation requires an upgrade. Carta also documents source-document extraction, so describing it as exclusively manual would be inaccurate. The important distinction is between extracting and administering equity data and assessing whether historical securities were legally effective.

  What are Carta's key cap table features?

  • Launch cap table administration: Cap table management, electronic securities, stock transfers, stakeholder access, and support are listed in the free product.
  • Launch financing tools: SAFE creation and scenario modeling help eligible companies prepare financing documents and explore ownership scenarios.
  • Document extraction with administrator review: Share Class Manager extracts information from incorporation documents and, for a company’s first priced round, preferred stock purchase agreements. An administrator reviews and saves the extracted data. Confirm availability in your intended package; this documentation does not establish a comprehensive legal-effectiveness assessment of every security.
  • Broader equity and reporting capabilities: Carta supports issuing, approving, and accepting option grants. Its plan descriptions place 409A valuations in Grow and GAAP/IFRS financial reporting in Scale. Confirm the package required for your option-grant workflow rather than assuming every capability comes with Launch.

  Which teams are best suited to Carta?

  • Eligible early-stage companies: Teams below both Launch thresholds that need its listed administration and financing tools, but do not yet need a 409A valuation, have a concrete reason to consider the free product.
  • Teams needing broader equity administration or investor workflows: Carta’s paid capabilities extend beyond basic ownership tracking. Separately, its investor-facing AI cap table builder extracts fields from incorporation documents, purchase agreements, SAFEs, and convertible notes for investor review and editing, alongside scenario modeling, waterfalls, ownership tracking, and ASC 820 valuations. Confirm product and package eligibility; these are not all Launch features.

  What does Carta Launch cost, and how is paid Carta priced?

  Launch is free, with no credit card required, for companies with under 25 stakeholders and less than $1 million raised. A company needing a 409A valuation must upgrade.

  Carta’s paid packages are quote-based, priced per stakeholder with a minimum annual fee. Optional products can add cost, so there is no universally applicable paid dollar price to quote. Request a company-specific proposal that identifies the package, included services, and additional products. Carta documents implementation-team onboarding support; that does not justify assuming every customer must purchase a separate migration service.

  Startup Legal Guru’s assessment: Carta deserves credit for operational breadth, including equity administration, valuation infrastructure, and distinct investor workflows. Its documented extraction tools also make “manual ledger only” an unfair description. Story.law offers a different proposition: holdings derived from effective documents through a legal-event graph, source-linked rows, and included lawyer review under an engagement letter. Choose based on whether you need administration, historical legal review, or both-not a presumed winner. Extraction and administrator review should not be treated as equivalent to comprehensive legal review. This is general information, not legal advice; consult a qualified lawyer about your cap table.

• How does Pulley's December 2026 shutdown affect the cap table decision?

  pulley.com

  Pulley is scheduled to cease all operations and services on December 8, 2026. As of the October 20, 2026 research date, it has announced a shutdown; it has not already shut down. Pulley identifies Carta as its exclusive transition partner and directs prospective customers to Carta. Existing customers are instructed to log in for account-specific offers and assisted migration. That changes the buying question: Pulley belongs in an existing-customer migration assessment, not on a shortlist of continuing services for a new annual subscription. Transition terms should be checked for each account.

  What features did Pulley's published packages include?

  Pulley's published Startup package listed these four feature groups:

  • Cap table management and certificates: ownership records and share certificates.
  • Templated signing: SAFE, option, and restricted stock agreement (RSA) signing.
  • Fundraising modeling: tools for modeling financing scenarios.
  • Onboarding and migration support: concierge onboarding, with hands-on migration also described in Pulley's finance-team guide.

  These legacy features describe the service being transitioned away from, not a recommendation to open a new Pulley account.

  Which teams should consider Pulley's transition information?

  • Existing customers evaluating Carta: log in to review account-specific transition offers and assisted migration rather than assuming every customer receives identical terms.
  • Existing customers comparing alternative workflows: assess other approaches before the announced cessation date, while distinguishing independent alternatives from Pulley's official Carta transition relationship.

  How should buyers interpret Pulley's legacy pricing?

  Pulley's still-accessible product article lists historical annual prices of $1,200 for Startup and $3,500 for Growth, with Enterprise priced by quote. Its legacy pricing page lists 25 stakeholders under Startup. No ongoing free tier was substantiated in the reviewed primary pages.

  Those figures are legacy-plan reference points-not evidence that a new buyer can purchase a continuing annual Pulley subscription. The shutdown announcement and direction to prospective customers take precedence over older package descriptions.

  For existing customers, the decision is which replacement workflow to evaluate before December 8-not whether Pulley's legacy price looks attractive. Carta is the announced exclusive transition partner. Startup Legal Guru's discussion of Story.law and other alternatives is an independent comparison, not a Pulley-endorsed transition route. Story.law describes a different approach: extracting uploaded documents into a legal-event graph, deriving holdings from effective documents, and linking rows to sources, with lawyer review included in its cap-table offering. Compare that workflow separately from any account-specific Carta migration offer.

• When is Eqvista's free cap table plan enough?

  eqvista.com

  Eqvista is a free-entry equity platform worth considering when a small team needs cap table administration without immediately buying valuation services. Its Freemium plan includes equity-management features, but founders should check eligibility: the pricing page says “fewer than 20 stakeholders,” while the FAQ says “up to 20 shareholders” and up to three users. Those descriptions are not identical, so do not assume exactly 20 stakeholders qualify, nor that you will have the option for investor access. The key distinction is between administering equity records and establishing that the underlying approvals, contracts, and exchange of value support those records.

  What are Eqvista's key cap table features?

  Freemium lists four feature groups:

  • Cap table and ESOP management: tools for administering ownership and employee equity plans.
  • Vesting schedules: support for recording vesting arrangements.
  • Stakeholder accounts: accounts for stakeholders on the platform.
  • Data room: a place to organize company documents.

  Premium adds e-signatures, board resolutions, voting, Rule 701 and Form 3921 tools, financial modeling, spreadsheet import, and onboarding. These are listed capabilities, not a promise that using the platform establishes legal compliance.

  Eqvista also describes assisted migration covering data transfer, error checking, cap table setup, and customer review. Its FAQ says migration is free for paid subscriptions. That supports a claim of assisted onboarding and data checks-not comprehensive lawyer review of approvals, signed contracts, and consideration for every free account.

  Which teams are best suited to Eqvista?

  • Small teams evaluating free equity administration: Freemium offers a way to assess cap table, vesting, stakeholder-account, and document-storage features, subject to confirming the eligibility boundary.
  • Teams considering paid compliance tools and valuation services: Premium and the stage-dependent 409A bundle are relevant when those additional capabilities become part of the purchasing decision.

  What do Eqvista's free plan, Premium, and valuation bundle cost?

  Freemium is advertised at $0. Because the pricing page and FAQ use different eligibility wording, confirm both stakeholder eligibility and user limits before relying on the free plan.

  Premium is advertised at $2 per stakeholder per month, with custom pricing above 50 stakeholders. Confirm any applicable minimum subscription charge rather than treating that unit rate as a guaranteed total bill.

  The 409A valuation plus Premium bundle starts at $990 annually for pre-revenue/pre-funding companies. Higher-stage prices differ; this is not a universal annual price. The free cap table does not include that valuation bundle.

  For comparison, Story.law's cap-table-only page lists $2,000 annually or $199 monthly, lawyer review and an engagement letter, and a seven-day trial requiring a card. The annual offer is also framed as a former-Pulley promotion, so eligibility and renewal terms need confirmation.

  Eqvista's free plan may be enough if the immediate need is equity administration within its confirmed limits. Under Startup Legal Guru's evidence-and-cost criteria, paid migration adds assistance, but error checking alone does not establish comprehensive legal review. Story.law describes a different approach: extracting uploaded documents into a legal-event graph, deriving holdings from effective documents, and linking each row to its source. Compare the evidence behind the records, review scope, and applicable price-not just the headline fee. Neither approach is a universal winner; consult a qualified lawyer about your own cap table. This is general information only.

• What can Cake Equity's free plan do before payment is required?

  www.cakeequity.com

  Cake Equity’s free plan permits equity actions for up to five stakeholders; it is not simply a read-only trial. Within that limit, teams can record financing instruments, prepare grants, issue equity, give stakeholders portal access, and model rounds. Above five stakeholders, an imported cap table remains viewable without payment, but taking actions requires a paid plan. Cake also offers self-service migration or customer-success-assisted migration without a migration charge. That makes it worth evaluating for administration, while keeping migration and row reconciliation separate from a documented legal-effectiveness review.

  What are Cake Equity's key cap table features?

  The free plan’s four feature groups, subject to the five-stakeholder action limit, are:

  • SAFE and note recording: Record SAFEs and convertible notes.
  • Grant preparation and equity issuance: Draft option grants and issue equity.
  • Stakeholder portals: Give stakeholders access through their portals.
  • Round modeling: Model financing rounds.

  Which teams are best suited to Cake Equity?

  • Teams with up to five stakeholders taking equity actions: The free plan supports the activities above within that limit.
  • Teams above five stakeholders evaluating their next step: An imported cap table can remain available for free viewing, while teams assess whether paid administration is worthwhile. Continued viewing does not mean continued free equity actions.

  What do Cake Equity's free and paid plans cost?

  The free plan supports actions for up to five stakeholders. Cake lists Build at $1,000 annually with 25 stakeholders and Team at $2,750 annually with 40 stakeholders. Pro is custom-priced, with advanced reporting and compliance features.

  According to Cake’s pricing FAQ, Team includes two 409A valuations. Other annual plans list a $1,500 409A valuation add-on, so valuation coverage should be part of the comparison rather than treated as included across every tier.

  Cake’s public pages disagree on additional-stakeholder pricing and Pro stakeholder entitlements. Ask Cake to confirm the applicable overage rate, billing interval, and Pro allowance before estimating total cost; the published figures do not support a definitive overage calculation.

  Both self-service migration and customer-success-assisted migration are available without a migration charge. The pricing page also describes row reconciliation. These are useful transfer and checking services, but the cited descriptions do not establish a review of whether each security became legally effective.

  Startup Legal Guru’s assessment: Cake’s five-stakeholder action limit and separate valuation costs are the practical buying checkpoints. Free viewing above that limit remains useful, but it is not free ongoing administration. For comparison, Story.law describes holdings derived from effective source documents, source-linked rows, and lawyer review under an engagement letter. Its page lists $2,000 annually or $199 monthly, with annual promotional eligibility and renewal terms requiring confirmation. These are different documented scopes; Cake’s migration and reconciliation should neither be dismissed nor assumed equivalent to that review.

• Is Capable free, and what does its document cleanup service add?

  capable.so

  Capable offers a free Excel template and a 14-day software trial without a card-not a permanent free operational software tier. Its template covers ownership, SAFE conversion, a priced round, and an exit waterfall, illustrating that spreadsheets can model more than a simple founder split. The limitation is verification: the spreadsheet does not know what was signed - someone supplies this data. Capable also sells a separate cleanup service that reconciles the cap table against signed documents. That distinction matters: free migration, paid software, and document reconciliation are different offerings, not interchangeable levels of assurance.

  What are Capable's key cap table features?

  • Securities and vesting: Startup includes securities administration and vesting features.
  • Modeling and stakeholder portals: Startup includes modeling tools and portals for stakeholders.
  • Exports and 409A recordkeeping: Startup includes exports and 409A recordkeeping; maintaining those records is not the same as purchasing an independent valuation report.
  • Growth workflows: Growth adds signing, approvals, tax/compliance tracking, and exercise payments.

  Which teams are best suited to Capable?

  • Teams evaluating unlimited-stakeholder administration: Both paid plans include unlimited stakeholders and administrators, making Capable worth comparing when those limits matter to the buying decision.
  • Teams seeking separately priced document reconciliation: The cleanup service explicitly reconciles against signed documents, giving buyers an option beyond importing existing records into software. Its professional review scope and engagement terms still need confirmation.

  What do Capable subscriptions, valuations, and cleanup cost?

  Startup costs $1,200 annually or $120 monthly. Growth costs $3,500 annually or $350 monthly. Published prices are in USD before tax, and both plans include unlimited stakeholders and administrators. The free software offer lasts 14 days and requires no card.

  Capable advertises both self-service import and done-for-you migration as free. Those are routes for getting existing data into the platform; they should not be confused with the separately priced document cleanup service. Buyers can import their own records or use the advertised migration service, while signed-document reconciliation is an additional purchase.

  Independent 409A reports cost $1,499, or $1,999 for rush service. Budget for that separately from the subscription: included 409A recordkeeping does not mean a valuation report is included. Cap table cleanup costs $3,500 and explicitly reconciles the table against signed documents.

  Startup Legal Guru’s assessment: compare three scopes separately-ongoing administration, signed-document cleanup, and independent valuation. Capable’s cleanup offering rules out a simplistic claim that only Story.law checks source documents. Story.law describes document-derived holdings and explicitly lists lawyer review and an engagement letter; Capable’s published cleanup description establishes reconciliation, not necessarily an equivalent legal engagement. Confirm who performs the cleanup, what review is included, and the engagement terms before treating the services as substitutes. This is general information only; consult a qualified lawyer about your own cap table.

• How does Story.law combine document-derived cap tables with lawyer review?

  story.law

  Story.law is the software arm of the Story Collaborative, which includes the Story LLP law firm dictating their software logic; Aegis is its underlying legal operations platform. According to Story.law, Aegis extracts information from uploaded documents, organizes it into a legal-event graph, and builds holdings from effective documents rather than starting with typed ownership balances. Its cap-table-only offering includes lawyer review under an engagement letter. For buyers, the relevant distinction is the combination of document processing, source traceability, and professional review-not a promise that uploading files establishes legal correctness. The service remains limited by the documents supplied and the scope of the engagement. The Aegis packages offer introductory automated diligence, a service no competitor appears to match.

  What are Story.law's key cap table features?

  • Uploaded-document extraction: Story.law says Aegis extracts information from the documents a client supplies to build the ownership record.
  • Legal-event graph: The platform organizes extracted information into a connected record of legal events, rather than only a current ownership balance.
  • Multi-document logic: The platform graphs relationships between key approvals to flag when they are missing.
  • Effective-document-based holdings: The provider says holdings are built from effective documents. Missing or ineffective paperwork can still require additional legal work.
  • Source-linked rows: Each row links to its supporting source, giving reviewers a way to trace an entry back to the underlying document.
  • Included lawyer review: The cap-table-only offering includes lawyer review and an engagement letter. Buyers should confirm precisely what that review covers.
  • Open Cap Format relationship: Story.law says its record is built on Open Cap Format, an open-source, JSON-based standard for exchanging capitalization data. That is a data-format relationship, not proof that the holdings are legally valid or that Story.law originated from the standard. Excel exports are available, advertised as "lawyer-format."

  What differentiates Story.law's cap table workflow?

  • Document-derived starting point: Story.law describes deriving holdings from effective documents rather than asking clients to supply ownership balances. Document extraction is not exclusive to Aegis: Carta documents extraction capabilities for incorporation documents and certain financing documents, followed by administrator review.
  • Row-level provenance: Source links can make individual entries easier to inspect. Their usefulness still depends on whether the supplied records are complete and support the entry.
  • Lawyer review within the offering: Review is included alongside the software workflow, giving buyers an identified professional review component. Its scope should be confirmed in the engagement letter; corrective work may cost extra.
  • Combined processing and legal engagement: Story.law packages document processing with a direct law-firm engagement for more complex analyses. This is a workflow distinction, not evidence that other providers ignore documents: Capable separately offers cleanup that reconciles against signed documents, but it's unclear what logic is used for that reconciliation.

  What are the benefits and limits of using Story.law?

  • Benefit-traceability: Source-linked holdings offer a concrete starting point for checking where an ownership entry came from.
  • Benefit-clearer review responsibility: An engagement letter can clarify the lawyer's role, provided the buyer checks the actual scope rather than assuming comprehensive coverage.
  • Benefit-combined workflow: Document processing and lawyer review are available within one offering, which may suit buyers seeking both rather than software alone.
  • Limit-supplied records: Analysis is limited to documents provided. Missing records are not resolved simply by uploading the available files.
  • Limit-additional legal work: Missing or ineffective paperwork may require separately paid corrective work, and exceptional cases require lawyer judgment.
  • Limit-valuation and outcomes: 409A valuations are offered separately. Neither extraction nor lawyer review guarantees diligence, fundraising, or valuation outcomes.

  Which teams are best suited to Story.law?

  These are illustrative, capability-based scenarios-not verified customer case studies.

  • Use case: Fragmented ownership records. A team with documents spread across files wants holdings linked to their supporting sources so discrepancies can be reviewed.
  • Use case: Financing or an ownership change. A transaction prompts the team to reconcile its ownership record with supporting documents. That need does not automatically make its existing free software inadequate; the question is who performs the reconciliation.
  • Use case: An existing Pulley customer comparing alternatives. A team evaluating its next workflow wants to compare a lawyer-reviewed, document-derived offering with software-led options, without assuming that a vendor change alone resolves record problems.

  What does Story.law's cap-table-only offering cost?

  The published price is $2,000 annually-approximately $166.67 per month billed annually-or $199 with monthly billing. These are different billing arrangements, not interchangeable monthly prices. Adding diligence, pro formas, and investment prep on an Aegis Raise plan is offered at a 65% discount pending the Pulley Shutdown - with $3500/yr pricing locked in.

  The page frames the annual offer as a former-Pulley promotion available until November 30, 2026. Confirm eligibility, renewal pricing, and the exact scope of included lawyer review before relying on that price. The seven-day trial requires a card and lawyer engagement. Story.law also offers a free, limited experience through its Pulley rescue path, which starts at captable.law, a site Story.law operates; free previews are available at either captable.law or story.law/rescue. Corrective legal work may be separately charged. Story.law also offers 409A valuations separately, but the cited page provides no verified valuation price.

  Startup Legal Guru's assessment is that Story.law merits consideration when the purchase is about reconstructing and reviewing the ownership record, not merely storing balances. Its stated source links and included lawyer review address traceability and review responsibility, but buyers should not treat those features as guarantees or assume all cleanup is included. Compare the engagement scope, document requirements, promotion terms, and additional charges against the work your existing provider or lawyer would perform. This is general information only; consult a qualified lawyer about your own cap table.

Is free cap table software good enough, or is lawyer review worth paying for in 2026?

Free can suffice for two or three founders, one common-stock class, no options, convertibles or outside investors, and complete, maintained issuance records. This is editorial fit guidance, not a legal safe harbor. Startup Legal Guru provides independent reviews and comparisons of legal providers for informational purposes only. We are not a law firm, we do not provide legal advice, and using this site does not create an attorney-client relationship. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change over time. Consult a licensed attorney about your specific situation before making any legal decision.

An option pool, SAFE or note financing, employee departure, priced round or acquisition discussion warrants reassessment-not an automatic software switch. A lawyer can review records in a free tool, but will generally charge an hourly rate - which means "free" isn't free if there's any complexity. Story.law may fit better when source-derived, source-linked holdings and included lawyer review matter. Its analysis covers supplied documents; missing or ineffective paperwork may require separately paid legal work. Buying software and obtaining review remain separate decisions. Compare review scope, supporting evidence, maintenance responsibility and separately priced work-not subscription price alone.