The honest comparison

There are three common ways organisations try to make their documents answer questions. Here's where each one breaks — and where Marella is different, on the record.

What regulated buyers need Public AI chatbots Enterprise search Build in-house Marella
Answers from your documents only No

answers from the open internet

Partly

finds documents, doesn't answer

Yes

if you build it

Yes

corpus-grounded by design

Passage-level citations on every answer No

confidence, not evidence

No

links to files at best

Partly

hard to get right

Yes

one click to the source

Says so when the documents don't answer No

guesses fluently

Partly

empty results page

Partly

depends on the build

Yes

honest by default

Your data never trains shared models No

check the terms, carefully

Partly

vendor-dependent

Yes Yes

contractual commitment

Access mirrors departments & roles No

one account, no walls

Partly

often bolted on

Partly

months of work

Yes

structural, with audit

Handles scans and messy legacy files Partly

upload limits, no pipeline

No

indexes clean text

Partly

the hardest 20%

Yes

built for ugly corpora

Knowledge that compounds (entities, ontology) No

every chat starts cold

No

an index, not memory

No

a research project

Yes

the knowledge network

UK hosting or private deployment No

their cloud, their rules

Partly

varies

Yes

your infrastructure

Yes

UK cloud or your estate

ISO 27001-certified provider Partly

certified, but see rows above

Partly

varies

No

you carry the audit

Yes

cert no. 24112, UKAS

Time to a working deployment Yes

instant — that's the problem

Partly

months

No

quarters, then upkeep

Yes

under six weeks

◐ means "sometimes, with caveats" — vendor- or build-dependent. Column judgements describe the typical case, not every product; bring your shortlist to a demo and we'll compare specifics.

The build-it-yourself trap

A credible in-house build isn't a model API call. It's retrieval that survives messy scans, permissions that mirror your org chart, citations that hold up to checking, evaluation, hosting, and a UI people actually adopt — then the upkeep, forever. Most teams that start discover the last 20% of documents costs 80% of the effort.

Marella is that engineering, already done, already certified, and delivered with the team who built it — typically live inside six weeks.

  • Document parsing that survives scans and faxes
  • Hybrid retrieval, tuned and evaluated
  • Passage-level citation plumbing
  • Departments, roles, decision traces, audit log
  • Ingestion queues, integrations, admin console
  • A workbench your staff will actually open

The questions that decide it

We already pay for Microsoft Copilot — why add Marella?

They do different jobs. Copilot is broad workplace assistance inside Microsoft 365. Marella is a governed document-intelligence platform: a curated corpus, passage-level citations on every answer, a knowledge network you own, and deployment options down to your own estate. Organisations run both — Copilot for drafting emails, Marella for questions where the answer has to be right and evidenced.

Why not just build this in-house?

You can — retrieval, parsing, permissions, citations, evaluation and UI are all buildable. But it's a serious multi-quarter engineering effort before the first user asks a question, and the messy-document 20% consumes most of it. Marella exists so that effort is already spent; your team starts at the pilot, not the architecture diagram.

Isn't enterprise search enough?

Search finds documents; someone still has to read them. Marella answers the question, cites the passage, and remembers what it learned in a knowledge network your team curates. Where search ends, the actual work begins — that's the part Marella does.

Compare it on your documents

Bring the tool you're considering — or the one you built — and run the same questions through Marella, side by side.

Private by design · ISO 27001 · Built in the UK