Polyfact vs Dixit: two approaches to public affairs monitoring

On its homepage, Dixit presents itself as “The best of AI for your public affairs” and describes its product in these terms: “The reliable, simple, and efficient AI solution for comprehensive public policy monitoring and strategic influence.” The title tag of that same page is even more explicit about scope: “Dixit - The best of tech at the heart of your EU affairs”. Its homepage spells out what is tracked: European Commission consultations, legislative files, European Parliament activity and Council publications.

Polyfact starts from the other end of the chain. Public affairs monitoring is treated as a continuum: an amendment tabled in the Assemblée nationale, an implementing decree in the JORF, a consultation opened by a regulator, a file under discussion in Brussels, and the video of the committee where all of it was said belong to the same piece of work. As of 31 July 2026, the platform indexes over 4 million documents and over one million amendments, across 60 connected institutions out of 489 catalogued.

The intended audience, on the other hand, largely overlaps. Dixit states on its homepage: “Trusted by leading public affairs teams in Brussels and Paris.” Its user base is described there as agencies, leading companies, federations and NGOs engaged in public affairs. The difference between the two tools is therefore not the profession they serve, but the institutional scope covered and the data layers processed.

The table below scores no one. It sets side by side what each vendor publishes on its own materials, consulted on 31 July 2026. The Dixit cells map to the excerpts listed at the end of this page; the Polyfact cells describe our own product — it is us.

This is the clearest gap between the two platforms, and the easiest one to check in a demo.

Dixit describes a setup geared towards live coverage: “Follow European Parliament sessions in real time without missing a word”, with automatic transcription and translation of debates, alerts when your topics are mentioned, and export of structured transcripts. That is valuable while the meeting is running and you have to react within the hour. A searchable video library after the fact, clickable second-level timestamps, or transcription of national sessions are not publicly mentioned on dixitplatform.com as of 31 July 2026 — and we draw no conclusion from that beyond the fact that it is not documented.

Polyfact treats video as an archive as much as a live feed. Debates from the Assemblée, the Sénat, the authorities and Brussels are transcribed, summarised and indexed by speaker; you search for a sentence, you land on the exact second, you copy the quote with its source. As of 31 July 2026, that means over 27,000 videos indexed, more than 16,000 of them transcribed and timestamped, and over 17,000 videos from the Assemblée nationale, the Sénat and the European Parliament, more than 10,000 of them transcribed.

The question to put to both vendors in a demo fits in one sentence: “a committee sat until 11 p.m. last night — what can I quote this morning, and in how many clicks?”

Dixit owns its European scope and states it in its own FAQ: asked which sectors it covers, the answer is “All of them. If it's being discussed at the EU level, it's monitored in Dixit, regardless of the policy area or industry.” Its monitoring page details the matching building blocks — Commission consultations, legislative files, European Parliament activity, Council publications, comitology and expert groups. The last two are frequent blind spots in nationally focused monitoring.

On the French side, the public materials we consulted — homepage, About page, pricing page and the three solution pages — mention neither the Assemblée nationale, nor the Sénat, nor Légifrance, nor the JORF; “Paris” appears only to locate teams and clients. We do not conclude that those sources are absent from the product: we observe that they are not publicly documented, and the question is worth putting to Dixit directly.

Polyfact publishes its scope and its limits in the same place: the coverage page shows what is connected and what is not yet, institution by institution. As of 31 July 2026, 60 institutions are collected out of 489 catalogued, across ten countries. It is partial, it is written down, and it is verifiable.

The decision criterion is then simple to state. If your issue is born in Brussels and ends there, a tool built entirely around that may be enough. If it crosses over — an EU regulation transposed into national law, a directive turned into decrees, a hearing in the Assemblée on a text negotiated in Brussels — continuity between the two levels becomes decisive, and that continuum is what Polyfact handles in a single tool.

Both platforms build on AI. Dixit describes itself as “The best of AI for your public affairs” and offers AI summaries of stakeholder contributions to European Commission consultations. Polyfact produces scheduled briefings, written alerts and analyst answers across all the data it collects.

The criterion that matters in public affairs is therefore not whether AI is present, but what you can do with its answer. A summary without references is a black box: impossible to quote, impossible to defend in front of a board, a client or a journalist. At Polyfact, every claim links back to its source — the official document, the amendment, or the exact second of video.

How sources are cited inside Dixit’s summaries is not publicly mentioned on the pages we consulted as of 31 July 2026. That is something to have demonstrated, not assumed — and the same applies to us. Here is the protocol we suggest running against both tools, on the same day, on the same file.

Dixit has real strengths, and they are consistent with its positioning. They can be read directly from its public materials.

Polyfact is the right choice when monitoring stops neither at a single institutional level nor at written text alone.

Our coverage is partial, and we publish it as such: 60 connected institutions out of 489 catalogued, ten countries where we already collect. If a source that is critical to you is not connected yet, you will see it before signing.

We publish no price list. There is no self-service pricing: the team runs a twenty-minute call to understand your issues and define the right scope, then sends you a proposal. Dixit likewise displays its three plans without prices, but does offer a seven-day free trial without a card, which we do not.

Finally, this comparison is written by one of the two vendors. We built it to be verifiable line by line — every statement about Dixit points to a public page and a dated excerpt — but the only useful judge remains a demo of both tools on your own file.