Compare
Azure Machine Learning, LlamaIndex, Google Vertex AI vs Azure AI Document Intelligence
Every row below is computed for the brief in section 01. Nothing here is a universal score.
- Source
- Registry and rules engines over one brief, 6 cells anchored in 6 fetched records
- Verified
- 20 Sep 2026
- Confidence
- Medium
01The brief this answers
No context was supplied, so this is a generic reading. Every figure below would move for a real brief.
The same tool can score differently for a different brief.
- Objective
- Data extraction
- Also
- Document classification · Document Q&A · Internal company search
- Jurisdictions
- none stated
- Industry
- unknown
- Employees
- unknown
- Data
- confidential material: yes · legally privileged material: not stated · personal data: likely · sensitive personal data: not stated
- Local processing
- not required
- Cloud allowed
- unknown
- Users
- unknown
- Capability
- unknown
- Preferred setup
- you did not state one
- Data risk
- high
Read by fixed rules, no language model · 40% confident it read the question correctly
We could not place: organisation.industry, requirements.dataResidency, requirements.existingStack, budget, jurisdictions.primary, organisation.employees, data sensitivity, deploymentPreference, technicalCapability
Not accounted for
Nothing in this comparison depends on your industry, any residency requirement, the systems you already run, your budget, the jurisdiction you operate in, your headcount, how sensitive the material is, a hosting preference or the technical capability you have in-house — none of it was supplied. Where a figure would move for one of those, it is stated as an assumption rather than hidden inside the number.
02Comparison
| Dimension | Azure Machine LearningToolCONSIDER IF…for enterprise SaaS under this brief | LlamaIndexToolSTRONG ALTERNATIVEfor self-hosted under this brief | Google Vertex AIToolRECOMMENDEDfor private cloud under this brief | Azure AI Document IntelligenceToolCONSIDER IF…for enterprise SaaS under this brief |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Deployment modelRegistry entry: how this is delivered, and which solution class it is scored as. | Enterprise SaaS The registry records Azure Machine Learning as available on vendor cloud or private cloud; it is scored here as enterprise SaaS. ASSESSMENT | Self-hosted The registry records LlamaIndex as available on self-hosted or private cloud; it is scored here as self-hosted. ASSESSMENT | Private cloud The registry records Google Vertex AI as available on vendor cloud or private cloud; it is scored here as private cloud. ASSESSMENT | Enterprise SaaS The registry records Azure AI Document Intelligence as available on vendor cloud or private cloud or on-premise enterprise; it is scored here as enterprise SaaS. ASSESSMENT |
| Verdict for this briefSolution-class analysis (buildOptions) over this brief. The verdict is on the class of answer, not on the product. | CONSIDER IF… For this brief — confidential documents — enterprise SaaS is conditional: worth it only if the conditions in the options section hold. Change the brief and this verdict changes. RECOMMENDATION | STRONG ALTERNATIVE For this brief — confidential documents — self-hosted is a strong alternative. Change the brief and this verdict changes. RECOMMENDATION | RECOMMENDED For this brief — confidential documents — private cloud is the recommended shape of answer. Change the brief and this verdict changes. RECOMMENDATION | CONSIDER IF… For this brief — confidential documents — enterprise SaaS is conditional: worth it only if the conditions in the options section hold. Change the brief and this verdict changes. RECOMMENDATION |
| Functional fitOntology overlap between the objective in this brief and the use cases the registry records for the subject (matchRecipes). Recorded for tools; not recorded per model. | unknown Azure Machine Learning is a platform for running a model you choose, not a product built for one job, so there is no use-case overlap to measure — what it does depends on what you build on it. The fit that can be assessed is the deployment's, in the rows below. ASSESSMENT | 87% Covers your main objective (data extraction) and 2 of 3 secondary objectives (document Q&A, internal company search). ASSESSMENT | unknown Google Vertex AI is a platform for running a model you choose, not a product built for one job, so there is no use-case overlap to measure — what it does depends on what you build on it. The fit that can be assessed is the deployment's, in the rows below. ASSESSMENT | 73% Covers your main objective (data extraction) and 1 of 3 secondary objectives (document classification). ASSESSMENT |
| Deployment fitHosting preference, data egress, headcount band and technical capability, weighted 0.30 / 0.35 / 0.15 / 0.20 (matchRecipes). | 74% You stated no hosting preference, so no option is favoured on that basis. No hard restriction on where processing happens was stated. This is a vendor-operated service. Your cloud account does not determine where it runs; confirm the vendor’s data processing and integration with your existing systems. ASSESSMENT | 74% You stated no hosting preference, so no option is favoured on that basis. No hard restriction on where processing happens was stated. You did not name a cloud you already run on, so no design is favoured on that basis. ASSESSMENT | 74% You stated no hosting preference, so no option is favoured on that basis. No hard restriction on where processing happens was stated. You did not name a cloud you already run on, so no design is favoured on that basis. ASSESSMENT | 74% You stated no hosting preference, so no option is favoured on that basis. No hard restriction on where processing happens was stated. This is a vendor-operated service. Your cloud account does not determine where it runs; confirm the vendor’s data processing and integration with your existing systems. ASSESSMENT |
| Data controlExternal transfer computed from the architecture graph of the deployment (computeExternalTransfer) — what actually crosses out of your network. | yes External data transfer: yes. No catalogue deployment names Azure Machine Learning, so this is read from “Document automation on a specialised SaaS product”, the best-matching enterprise SaaS deployment for this brief. Confidential content leaves your control on the Finance / operations team (validation) → Document-automation product link. ASSESSMENT | none External data transfer: none. No catalogue deployment names LlamaIndex, so this is read from “Document classification and OCR pipeline”, the best-matching self-hosted deployment for this brief. No edge in this design crosses out of the company network. ASSESSMENT | some External data transfer: some. Computed from “Document extraction pipeline in your cloud account”, the catalogue deployment that names Google Vertex AI and best matches this brief. Confidential content leaves your premises for your own cloud tenancy ("Private endpoints"). You keep control of the account; the provider is a processor, so a DPA and a documented region apply. ASSESSMENT | yes External data transfer: yes. No catalogue deployment names Azure AI Document Intelligence, so this is read from “Document automation on a specialised SaaS product”, the best-matching enterprise SaaS deployment for this brief. Confidential content leaves your control on the Finance / operations team (validation) → Document-automation product link. ASSESSMENT |
| Data residencyVendor documents we have fetched. A residency commitment we have not read is “unknown” — never assumed (CONTENT-RULES §5). | unknown We have fetched a supported-countries page for Azure Machine Learning, which says where the product may be bought — not where content is processed or stored. No residency commitment has been read, so the residency question is unknown. The vendor is headquartered in United States, which is where a transfer question starts, not where it ends. ASSESSMENT | you decide Self-hosted: the content stays wherever you run the server, so residency is a property of your own infrastructure rather than a vendor commitment. ASSESSMENT | unknown We have fetched a supported-countries page for Google Vertex AI, which says where the product may be bought — not where content is processed or stored. No residency commitment has been read, so the residency question is unknown. The vendor is headquartered in United States, which is where a transfer question starts, not where it ends. ASSESSMENT | unknown We have fetched a supported-countries page for Azure AI Document Intelligence, which says where the product may be bought — not where content is processed or stored. No residency commitment has been read, so the residency question is unknown. The vendor is headquartered in United States, which is where a transfer question starts, not where it ends. ASSESSMENT |
| Governance controlsThe four commitments a processor is asked for — DPA, subprocessor list, no training on your content, zero retention — counted against fetched vendor documents. | 2 of 4 Published and fetched: data processing agreement, subprocessor list. Still open: training on customer data, zero retention option — ask the vendor. FACT | not applicable Run on your own infrastructure, so the vendor questions apply only to whatever you still buy. We hold none of the four commitments for this subject, and for a self-hosted deployment none of them is required. ASSESSMENT | 2 of 4 Published and fetched: data processing agreement, subprocessor list. Still open: training on customer data, zero retention option — ask the vendor. FACT | 2 of 4 Published and fetched: data processing agreement, subprocessor list. Still open: training on customer data, zero retention option — ask the vendor. FACT |
| Integration effortThe FDE-day band the catalogue deployment was costed from (RECIPE_IMPLEMENTATION_DAYS). | 5–14 FDE-days 5–14 FDE-days to implement. No catalogue deployment names Azure Machine Learning, so this is read from “Document automation on a specialised SaaS product”, the best-matching enterprise SaaS deployment for this brief. ASSESSMENT | 6–15 FDE-days 6–15 FDE-days to implement. No catalogue deployment names LlamaIndex, so this is read from “Document classification and OCR pipeline”, the best-matching self-hosted deployment for this brief. ASSESSMENT | 8–22 FDE-days 8–22 FDE-days to implement. Computed from “Document extraction pipeline in your cloud account”, the catalogue deployment that names Google Vertex AI and best matches this brief. ASSESSMENT | 5–14 FDE-days 5–14 FDE-days to implement. No catalogue deployment names Azure AI Document Intelligence, so this is read from “Document automation on a specialised SaaS product”, the best-matching enterprise SaaS deployment for this brief. ASSESSMENT |
| Maintenance burdenWho operates the result, read from the solution class and the difficulty factors the deployment carries. | vendor-operated The vendor runs the service. Your standing work is access control, the policy staff work under, and re-reading the contract and subprocessor list when they change — not patching or capacity. ASSESSMENT | you operate it You own GPU drivers and the model server, the connectors and their credentials, operating-system patching and backups. Assessed difficulty 3/5 is the shape of that work; someone has to hold it after go-live. ASSESSMENT | you operate, provider hosts You own GPU drivers and the model server, the connectors and their credentials, operating-system patching and backups. Assessed difficulty 4/5 is the shape of that work; someone has to hold it after go-live. ASSESSMENT | vendor-operated The vendor runs the service. Your standing work is access control, the policy staff work under, and re-reading the contract and subprocessor list when they change — not patching or capacity. ASSESSMENT |
| Deployment difficultyDifficulty 1–5 for the deployment and for this team (scoreDifficulty): the same stack scores lower for an organisation with its own engineers. | 3/5 3/5. Starting point 1/5: a vendor product, configured rather than installed. +0.5 Single sign-on adds an identity provider, group-to-role mapping and a joiner/leaver process to the deployment. ASSESSMENT | 3/5 3/5. Starting point 2/5: software you install, run and keep running on your own machines. +0.5 You run the model server yourself: GPU drivers, quantisation choice, memory headroom and restarts are all yours to own. ASSESSMENT | 4/5 4/5. Starting point 2/5: your own tenancy to build in, but no hardware to buy or rack. +0.5 You run the model server yourself: GPU drivers, quantisation choice, memory headroom and restarts are all yours to own. ASSESSMENT | 3/5 3/5. Starting point 1/5: a vendor product, configured rather than installed. +0.5 Single sign-on adds an identity provider, group-to-role mapping and a joiner/leaver process to the deployment. ASSESSMENT |
| Estimated costIndicative cost for this headcount (estimateCost), plus any per-token price we have actually fetched. A price we have not read is not printed. | USD 3,800 – 27,000 + licences USD 3,800 – 27,000 — one-off — for Azure Machine Learning at this headcount. No catalogue deployment names Azure Machine Learning, so this is read from “Document automation on a specialised SaaS product”, the best-matching enterprise SaaS deployment for this brief. Licences are not in that figure: no per-seat price has been read from the vendor’s own pricing page, so the software line is excluded from the total rather than guessed. Read it as implementation only. ASSESSMENT | USD 6,100 – 33,000 USD 6,100 – 33,000 — one-off — for LlamaIndex at this headcount. No catalogue deployment names LlamaIndex, so this is read from “Document classification and OCR pipeline”, the best-matching self-hosted deployment for this brief. ASSESSMENT | USD 6,100 – 43,000 USD 6,100 – 43,000 — one-off — for Google Vertex AI at this headcount. Computed from “Document extraction pipeline in your cloud account”, the catalogue deployment that names Google Vertex AI and best matches this brief. ASSESSMENT | USD 3,800 – 27,000 + licences USD 3,800 – 27,000 — one-off — for Azure AI Document Intelligence at this headcount. No catalogue deployment names Azure AI Document Intelligence, so this is read from “Document automation on a specialised SaaS product”, the best-matching enterprise SaaS deployment for this brief. Licences are not in that figure: no per-seat price has been read from the vendor’s own pricing page, so the software line is excluded from the total rather than guessed. Read it as implementation only. ASSESSMENT |
| CustomisationRegistry entry: whether the source is open and where the deployment can be changed. | vendor-configured Azure Machine Learning is a vendor product: you configure what the vendor exposes — policies, connectors, retention settings — and nothing below that line. ASSESSMENT | source available The registry files LlamaIndex as open source, so the interface, retrieval behaviour and the model behind it can be changed — subject to the licence, which is a fetched fact on its own page. ASSESSMENT | vendor-configured Google Vertex AI is a vendor product: you configure what the vendor exposes — policies, connectors, retention settings — and nothing below that line. ASSESSMENT | vendor-configured Azure AI Document Intelligence is a vendor product: you configure what the vendor exposes — policies, connectors, retention settings — and nothing below that line. ASSESSMENT |
| Relevant compliance evidenceThe compliance engine over this brief and this subject (assessCompliance), with each issue cited to the instrument it quotes where the page was fetched. | 8 issues · 0 cited 8 issues spotted for this brief, 0 of them legal requirements; 0 carry a quote from the instrument they rest on. Leading with: Confidentiality duties bind independently of data protection law. ASSESSMENT | 7 issues · 0 cited 7 issues spotted for this brief, 0 of them legal requirements; 0 carry a quote from the instrument they rest on. Leading with: Self-hosting moves the security obligation to you. ASSESSMENT | 9 issues · 0 cited 9 issues spotted for this brief, 0 of them legal requirements; 0 carry a quote from the instrument they rest on. Leading with: Confidentiality duties bind independently of data protection law. ASSESSMENT | 8 issues · 0 cited 8 issues spotted for this brief, 0 of them legal requirements; 0 carry a quote from the instrument they rest on. Leading with: Confidentiality duties bind independently of data protection law. ASSESSMENT |
Comparing
- Azure Machine Learningremove Azure Machine Learning from this comparison
- LlamaIndexremove LlamaIndex from this comparison
- Google Vertex AIremove Google Vertex AI from this comparison
- Azure AI Document Intelligenceremove Azure AI Document Intelligence from this comparison
Add one that serves the same objective
This table is full at 4 subjects. Remove one to add another — beyond four, the columns stop being readable and the comparison stops being one.
- Amazon Textract
- Docling
- Google Document AI
- Milvus
- Mindee
- MinerU
- Nanonets
- olmOCR
03What this does not tell you
- WARNINGCompare no jurisdiction
No jurisdiction was supplied, so only the cross-cutting rules ran. A comparison for a regulated deployment should name one.
- MINORCompare objective derived
No objective was given, so functional fit is measured against data extraction — the use case most of these subjects share. Add one to the link to measure a different job.
- MINORCompare recipe substituted
No catalogue deployment names Azure Machine Learning, so its cost, effort and difficulty are read from “Document automation on a specialised SaaS product”, the closest enterprise SaaS deployment for this brief.
- MINORCompare recipe substituted
No catalogue deployment names LlamaIndex, so its cost, effort and difficulty are read from “Document classification and OCR pipeline”, the closest self-hosted deployment for this brief.
- MINORCompare recipe substituted
No catalogue deployment names Azure AI Document Intelligence, so its cost, effort and difficulty are read from “Document automation on a specialised SaaS product”, the closest enterprise SaaS deployment for this brief.
Structured issue-spotting to support your own review — not legal advice. Verify against the cited primary sources and your counsel.
04Evidence
- 01Tier 2official vendor legal documentationVendor legal and technical documentation
Region availability for Foundry Models sold by Azure - Microsoft Foundry
https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/foundry/foundry-models/concepts/models-sold-directly-by-azure-region-availability
AgeingRetrieved 20 Sep 2026sha256:006f84ba9ea61 record
- 02Tier 2official vendor legal documentationVendor legal and technical documentation
Global Locations - Regions & Zones | Google Cloud
https://cloud.google.com/about/locations
AgeingRetrieved 20 Sep 2026sha256:54edd9a1f8661 record
- 03Tier 2official vendor legal documentationVendor legal and technical documentation
https://www.microsoft.com/licensing/docs/view/Microsoft-Products-and-Services-Data-Protection-Addendum-DPA
AgeingRetrieved 20 Sep 2026sha256:7bcef261059f1 record
- 04Tier 2official vendor legal documentationVendor legal and technical documentation
Microsoft Data Access | Microsoft Trust Center
https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/trust-center/privacy/data-access
AgeingRetrieved 20 Sep 2026sha256:a771da2496e71 record
- 05Tier 2official vendor legal documentationVendor legal and technical documentation
Cloud Data Processing Addendum | Google Cloud
https://cloud.google.com/terms/data-processing-addendum
AgeingRetrieved 20 Sep 2026sha256:eedabd6f9ca11 record
- 06Tier 2official vendor legal documentationVendor legal and technical documentation
Google Cloud Platform Subprocessors | Google Cloud
https://cloud.google.com/terms/subprocessors
AgeingRetrieved 20 Sep 2026sha256:1549c29f3f771 record