Clayfield vs HAQQ

Clayfield's own site states: "Your documents never leave European jurisdiction and are hosted in Frankfurt, Germany," and "The data you share with us always remains private and is never used to train the underlying AI models." It also states that "Attorney-client privilege, professional secrecy (§ 43a BRAO) applies to every matter," the same duty that binds a licensed German lawyer.

Beyond that pitch, Clayfield discloses far less publicly than the other firms in this set: no published pricing, no named founders, and no funding details found in public search results or on its own homepage. That is a finding in its own right, not an oversight in our research, and it makes several of Clayfield's other claims harder to independently verify than a firm like Compound Law, which publishes its team and its rates.

Clayfield names FinTech, RegTech and HealthTech as its target industries and focuses on EU regulatory work: GDPR, NIS2, the EU AI Act, DORA. Its pricing model is described only as flat-fee pricing agreed before work begins, with no published rates.

No founder names, funding amount, investor list or company registration detail could be found in public search results or on the homepage itself. Compound Law, a similarly positioned German-market AI-native firm, publishes both its founders and its price list; the gap in disclosure here is notable on its own.