Clio vs Intuit
Developer ecosystem comparison across GitHub activity, SDKs, documentation, community, reach and momentum.
Clio and Intuit (Powering prosperity around the world.) both appear on the Smoower Developer Ecosystem Index.
Intuit (rank #237) holds a modest lead over Clio (rank #625) on the overall Smoower ecosystem score (48 vs 33). The gap of 15 points reflects composite signals across code, docs, community and reach.
On code quality (the state of repositories, tests, releases and polish), Intuit is ahead of Clio. On education (docs, guides and learning material for developers), Clio is slightly ahead of Intuit. On community (issue response, PR reviews and discussion health), Intuit is clearly ahead of Clio. On reach (how visible the ecosystem is beyond its own repos), Intuit is clearly ahead of Clio. On momentum (release cadence and how fast the ecosystem moves), Clio is slightly ahead of Intuit.
Clio carries 518 GitHub stars across 19 public repos, with 4 repositories active in the last 90 days and 3 external contributors on record. Intuit shows 18,182 stars across 150 public repos, 27 active in the last 90 days and 40 external contributors. The star gap on its own does not decide the comparison, but Intuit's footprint is roughly 35.1x larger, which usually shows up in downstream signals like inbound issues and third party integrations.
Clio is the stronger read for anyone weighting education. Intuit looks better where community is the deciding factor. The table below breaks the scores down pillar by pillar; the linked profiles cover the underlying repos, docs and community signals in full.
Side-by-side metrics
| Metric | Clio | Intuit |
|---|---|---|
| Ranking | ||
| Overall rank | #625 | #237 |
| Pillars | ||
| Overall | 33 | 48 |
| Code | 50 | 65 |
| Education | 84 | 76 |
| Community | 18 | 48 |
| Reach | 0 | 24 |
| Momentum | 42 | 37 |
| Builder experience | 0 | 0 |
| Signals | ||
| Stars | 518 | 18,182 |
| Forks | 163 | 4,233 |
| Public repos | 19 | 150 |
| Active repos (90d) | 4 | 27 |
| External contributors | 3 | 40 |
| Avg polish | 38 | 70 |
| Avg AI-readiness | 39 | 40 |