All comparisons

Conductor vs Raw LLMs

Large language models provide powerful capabilities, but enterprise document intelligence requires more than API access. This guide explains what you need to build and helps you decide whether to build or buy.

What you need to build

Raw LLM APIs provide language understanding. Document intelligence requires a complete stack around that capability. Here is what production deployment typically involves.

Document parsing

Medium complexity

Extract text, tables, and structure from PDFs, Word docs, images, and other formats. Handle OCR for scanned documents.

Maintenance: Ongoing updates for new formats

Chunking strategy

High complexity

Split documents into appropriately sized segments that preserve context and meaning for retrieval.

Maintenance: Tuning required per document type

Vector database

Medium complexity

Store and query document embeddings efficiently. Manage index updates, scaling, and performance.

Maintenance: Infrastructure management, scaling

Retrieval pipeline

High complexity

Find relevant document chunks for each query. Implement hybrid search, reranking, and relevance tuning.

Maintenance: Continuous optimisation

Prompt engineering

High complexity

Design prompts that produce accurate, consistent responses. Handle edge cases and failure modes.

Maintenance: Updates with model changes

Citation system

High complexity

Track which document sections informed each response. Provide verifiable source references.

Maintenance: Accuracy monitoring

User interface

Medium complexity

Build search interface, document viewer, citation display, and administrative controls.

Maintenance: Feature development

Security layer

High complexity

Implement authentication, authorisation, data encryption, and audit logging.

Maintenance: Security updates, compliance

Hidden complexities

Building document intelligence looks straightforward in tutorials. Production systems encounter complexities that are not obvious until you are deep into development.

Chunking is harder than it looks

Naive chunking (splitting by character count) destroys context. Effective chunking requires understanding document structure, preserving tables intact, handling headers/footers, and maintaining semantic coherence. Each document type may need different strategies.

Retrieval quality determines output quality

If retrieval returns the wrong chunks, even the best LLM produces incorrect answers. Achieving high retrieval accuracy requires hybrid search (semantic + keyword), reranking, query expansion, and extensive tuning.

Citations require architectural decisions

Accurate citations need to be built into the system from the start. Retrofitting citation tracking to an existing RAG pipeline is significantly more difficult than building it in initially.

Prompt brittleness

Prompts that work well in testing often fail on edge cases in production. Model updates can change behaviour unexpectedly. Maintaining prompt quality requires ongoing monitoring and adjustment.

Hallucination mitigation

LLMs can generate plausible-sounding but incorrect information. Building reliable document Q&A requires grounding mechanisms, confidence scoring, and fallback behaviours.

Scale and performance

Systems that work for hundreds of documents often struggle with thousands. Vector search performance, embedding costs, and response latency all require careful architecture.

Team requirements

Building enterprise-grade document intelligence typically requires a cross-functional team. Here are the roles commonly needed.

Role
Responsibilities
Typical
ML/AI engineer
Design RAG architecture, select models, tune retrieval, manage embeddings
1-2 FTEs
Backend engineer
Build APIs, integrations, data pipelines, queue management
1-2 FTEs
Frontend engineer
Build user interface, document viewer, search experience
1 FTE
DevOps/Infrastructure
Deploy vector database, manage scaling, monitoring, security
0.5-1 FTE
Security engineer
Implement access controls, encryption, compliance requirements
0.5 FTE

Total estimate: 4-6 FTEs for initial build, plus ongoing maintenance capacity. Actual requirements vary based on scope, existing infrastructure, and team experience.

Capability comparison

A detailed look at what building with raw LLMs involves versus what Conductor provides out of the box.

Capability
Raw LLM APIs
Conductor
Document parsing
Build or integrate third-party parsers for each format (PDF, DOCX, images, etc.)
Multi-format parsing included with table extraction and structure preservation
RAG pipeline
Design chunking strategy, select embedding model, build retrieval logic, implement reranking
Optimised retrieval pipeline tuned for enterprise documents
Citations
Build citation tracking, source attribution, and page-level reference system
Automatic page-level citations with source verification
Multi-document queries
Implement cross-document retrieval and synthesis logic
Native support for queries across document collections
Enterprise security
Build authentication, role-based access, encryption, audit logging from scratch
ISO 27001:2022 certified with enterprise security controls
Private deployment
Complex infrastructure setup for air-gapped or private cloud deployment
UK-hosted private deployment option available
Ongoing maintenance
Update for model changes, security patches, performance tuning
Managed updates and maintenance included
Time to production
Typically 3-6 months for enterprise-ready deployment
Days to weeks depending on integration requirements

When to use each approach

Building with raw LLMs and using a platform like Conductor serve different needs. The right choice depends on your priorities, resources, and timeline.

Build with raw LLMs when:

Highly custom requirements

When your use case requires specific model fine-tuning, custom architectures, or capabilities beyond document Q&A that justify the investment.

Research and experimentation

When exploring what is possible with LLMs, testing hypotheses, or building proof-of-concepts before committing to a production system.

Deep ML expertise available

When your team has significant experience building production ML systems and can leverage that expertise for competitive advantage.

Long-term platform investment

When document intelligence is a core competency you want to own and develop over years, not a tool you need to deploy quickly.

Use Conductor when:

Document intelligence is a tool, not the product

When you need document search and Q&A capabilities to support your business, not as the core of what you sell.

Time-to-value matters

When you need working document intelligence in weeks rather than months, and want to focus engineering resources on your core product.

Enterprise requirements

When you need ISO certifications, UK data residency, audit logging, and enterprise security controls without building them yourself.

Citation accuracy is critical

When your use case requires verifiable, page-level source attribution that users can trust and verify.

Limited ML expertise

When your team is strong in software engineering but does not have deep experience with RAG architectures and retrieval tuning.

Predictable costs

When you prefer subscription pricing over variable infrastructure costs and ongoing development investment.

Decision framework

Use these questions to guide your build vs buy decision.

Is document intelligence core to your product?

If document Q&A is a supporting capability rather than your main offering, building from scratch may not be the best use of engineering resources.

What is your timeline?

Building production-ready document intelligence typically takes 3-6 months. If you need capabilities sooner, a platform approach offers faster time-to-value.

What expertise does your team have?

Building effective RAG systems requires specific experience with retrieval, embeddings, and prompt engineering. Teams without this background face a steeper learning curve.

What are your compliance requirements?

Enterprise requirements like ISO 27001, UK data residency, and audit logging add significant development effort. Platforms that already meet these requirements reduce compliance burden.

How important are citations?

If your users need to verify answers against source documents, citation accuracy is critical. Building reliable citation systems requires significant architectural investment.

Evaluate both approaches

The right choice depends on your specific requirements, timeline, and team capabilities. We can discuss your use case and help you understand whether Conductor fits your needs.