Perplexity for the open web.docAnalyzer for your private docs.
Perplexity Spaces grounds answers in web sources. docAnalyzer grounds answers in the documents you uploaded, and only those, if you choose. For confidential, regulated, or proprietary work, that distinction is the whole product.
No credit card. Free tier covers everyday Q&A.
The web is one source. Your documents are a different one.
Perplexity Spaces lets you mix your uploaded files with web-grounded answers. That's powerful for research where you want the latest information stitched into your sources. It's the wrong shape when the work is confidential, regulated, or grounded only in your own materials.
Legal teams reading sealed agreements. Researchers analyzing unpublished data. Insurers adjudicating claims. Government workers handling records requests. None of these benefit from web augmentation, and most of them are made worse by it.
Citations to your sources, not the web.
When a Perplexity answer cites a source, the source is a URL: a web page, a public article, whatever the engine found relevant. When a docAnalyzer answer cites a source, the source is the document you uploaded, opened at the exact page. The distinction is not a feature; it's a different machine. Set context-adherence high and the model stays strictly inside your sources; the web doesn't enter.
Perplexity Spaces
docAnalyzer
Source grounding
Mix of uploaded files and live web. Citations include web URLs.
Only the documents you uploaded, if you choose. Citations are clickable references to your source pages.
Confidential / regulated work
Web augmentation is on by default. Not the right shape for sealed contracts, unpublished research, or regulated records.
Per-tenant isolation, no training on customer content, no web augmentation. Built for confidential workflows.
Batch workflows
Not supported. Conversational only.
Five workflows (Summarizer, Data Extractor, Individual, Blueprint, Humanizer) run across every source in a dataset.
Reusable file outputs
Text answers. No native PDF, spreadsheet, or chart generation.
The model produces real PDFs, XLSX, HTML, charts, diagrams: downloadable as chips, reusable across turns.
Workspace persistence
Spaces are per-topic collections, lighter on multi-project organization.
Workspaces with documents, notes, labels, threads. Persistent. Multi-project. Datasets are built from any combination.
In their own words
“I especially appreciate the ability to click on citations taken from the documents I uploaded. I can see where the LLM took text from, check the context, and validate that it didn't originate from a hallucination.”
Duayne G. (Capterra)
What Perplexity users push on hardest.
Perplexity already does sources and citations.
Perplexity cites the web. docAnalyzer cites the documents you uploaded, and only those, if you choose. For regulated or confidential work, that distinction is not a feature, it's the whole product.
Web augmentation is useful for my research.
Honest: yes, often. For research that benefits from current public information, Perplexity stays useful, and many users have both. docAnalyzer is for the work where mixing your sources with the web is wrong, not for the work where it's right.
I trust Perplexity's brand on AI quality.
docAnalyzer runs 30+ models across a dozen providers, including the underlying models Perplexity uses. The model isn't the differentiator. The agentic loop and the data positioning are.
Perplexity Pro at $20/mo already covers my research.
docAnalyzer's free tier covers everyday Q&A on your own documents. Paid tiers add the workflows and downloadable files Perplexity Spaces doesn't have: different problem, different bill. Most users who keep both treat them as complementary, not competing.