Most consulting non-competes fail for the same reason: they were written broad enough to feel safe and vague enough to be void. This generator builds the version that holds up — a narrow, defined market, restrictions matched to what the client actually needs protected, a period a court respects, carve-outs, stated consideration, and a reformation clause. Fill in the fields, preview it live, and copy or download it — free.
The one-page agreement updates live as you type — free to preview. Enter your email to copy or download it.
Enter your email to unlock your finished non-compete agreement — copy the formatted text to your clipboard or download it as a file (opens in any browser, prints to PDF). We'll also send you consulting launch tips — no spam, unsubscribe anytime.
Preview is always free · Email unlocks copy & download
The generator above builds all seven parts automatically. Here's what each one does and why it matters.
The restricted market is the single biggest enforceability lever in the document. 'Freight brokerage analytics sold to shippers in the US and Canada' is a scope a court can evaluate; 'the logistics industry' is a restraint on an entire profession and gets the covenant voided. Section 4 of this generator's output exists to make the scope the exclusive measure of where the restrictions reach — everything outside it is unrestricted, stated on the face of the agreement.
Three post-engagement restraints, in descending order of enforceability: non-solicit customers, non-solicit employees, and no-serve-named-competitors. The non-solicit clauses are the consulting-market standard precisely because they leave the consultant free to keep working in the industry; the outright competitor ban is the one clients want most and courts trust least. This generator lets you include any mix — and the mix you choose is a negotiation, not a technicality.
Six to twelve months is the range that survives review for an individual consultant; twelve is the practical ceiling and this generator's default. The reasoning is economic: consulting relationships decay fast, and a two-year bar on a solo consultant's whole market is a hardship courts weigh directly. A shorter period is also more likely to be enforced exactly as written instead of cut down or discarded.
Prior clients, non-competing business units, and passive investments under 2% — three exceptions that cost the client almost nothing and signal to a court that the covenant protects a real interest rather than punishing the consultant. Their absence is what makes a non-compete look punitive, and 'punitive' is the finding reasonableness review exists to reach.
A restriction someone gives away for nothing is on weaker footing than one that was paid for. The standard shape is the mutual covenants of the underlying agreement; the stronger shape, increasingly expected in states with restrictive-covenant statutes, is a specific one-time fee for accepting the restrictions. Both are built in — and if a client insists on a broad covenant, pricing it is the consultant's counter-move.
The blue-pencil clause asks a tribunal that finds a restriction overbroad to narrow it to the maximum enforceable scope rather than throw the agreement out. Courts aren't bound by it, but it is a clear statement of intent that regularly improves outcomes — and it pairs with the governing-law choice, which in this document is stated openly rather than buried, because for a non-compete the choice of state law can decide everything.
This is the cluster's most state-sensitive document: some states refuse to enforce post-engagement non-competes outright, several condition them on earnings thresholds or notice, and the rest apply reasonableness review. The generator's output says, on its face, that the agreement yields to any law that cannot be waived — and the footer says get a lawyer. That honesty is a feature: an agreement that pretends the law away is the one that ends up in a drawer, unenforced.
A consulting non-compete is really a stack of separate restraints. Offer the narrow ones first — a client who trusts the NDA and the non-solicit often stops asking for the market-wide ban.
What it does: Bars soliciting or accepting business from the client's customers you had contact with — or learned of — during the engagement, with a carve-out for general public advertising.
When to use it: The default restriction and the easiest to justify: it protects the client's customer relationships without stopping you from consulting in the industry. Courts enforce it far more consistently than an outright non-compete.
What it does: Bars recruiting or hiring away the client's employees you worked with — with a carve-out for general public job postings.
When to use it: Matters most on engagements where you embedded with the client's team and know exactly who is good. Symmetric and uncontroversial: poaching the team you met through the engagement is the fact pattern courts sanction most readily.
What it does: Bars serving a named list of the client's actual competitors — inside the defined restricted market only.
When to use it: The client's biggest ask, and the one to give narrowly: name the specific competitors, tie the ban to the defined market, and carve out their non-competing units. An unnamed 'all competitors in the industry' version is the classic overbroad covenant that gets voided.
Every one of these shows up in a copy-pasted template. The generator above defaults away from all six.
Employment covenants assume a salary, benefits, and a job to come back to; a consultant is an independent business with neither. The consequence isn't cosmetic — courts weigh the hardship of time out of market differently for a solo practice, several states treat contractor covenants more strictly than employee ones, and the consideration rules differ (an at-will job is consideration in some states; a consulting engagement may not be). Write the covenant for the actual relationship, which is what this generator does.
The restricted-market definition is where non-competes live or die. 'The logistics industry' restrains an entire profession in a global sector; 'freight brokerage analytics sold to shippers in the US and Canada' restrains one segment of one market. The first gets voided as overbroad, the second gets enforced. If you can't describe the market in a sentence a stranger could apply, you don't have an enforceable definition yet — you have an ambition.
Duration is a hardship calculation, not a number from a template. Twelve months is the ceiling most courts respect for an individual consultant, because beyond that the bar stops protecting a decaying interest and starts being a career tax. And the error compounds: an overlong covenant taints the court's read of the whole document, making even the reasonable clauses look like overreach. Short is stronger.
Carve-outs — prior clients, a competitor's non-competing units, passive public-market investments — cost the client nothing material and do real legal work: they demonstrate that the covenant protects a legitimate interest rather than simply punishing the consultant for leaving. Their absence is evidence in the other direction. When a client's template has none, adding these three is the easiest negotiation win in the document.
A signature proves assent, not validity. Several states refuse to enforce post-engagement non-competes regardless of what was signed; others condition enforcement on earnings thresholds, notice at signing, or statutory language that overrides the document. And the reasonableness test everywhere else is a court's judgment call made years later, on facts neither party controlled. Build for the review, not the signature — narrow scope, short duration, carve-outs, and honest governing law.
The two traps that hide in client-drafted non-competes: a restriction period that restarts with each new statement of work (so the covenant never starts running down), and a choice-of-law clause pointing at a state whose covenant rules are far worse for you than your own. Both are single sentences, both are routinely struck or negotiated when caught, and both are invisible unless you read for them. For anything that materially restrains your livelihood, have a licensed attorney read it too — this generator is education, not legal advice.
A non-compete sits at the edge of the engagement — the tools below cover the middle: win the client, price the work, scope it, sign it, bill it, and end it cleanly when the time comes.
The document this non-compete usually attaches to — master terms and renewal, the SOW mechanism with order of precedence, billing rails, IP ownership, a liability cap, and termination on one page.
The single-engagement foundation — contractor status, enumerated services, payment terms with a deposit, IP assignment, and termination, ready to sign.
The narrowest post-engagement restraint and the easiest to enforce — mutual or one-way confidentiality with a survival period and standard exclusions.
The end of the engagement is what starts the restricted period running — end it in writing, with the notice clock, work in progress, and the final invoice protected.
Win the next engagement outside the restricted market — client context, problem, scope phases, deliverables, four pricing models, and signature blocks on one page.
The full one-page consulting agreement — scope, payment, IP, confidentiality, and termination — for engagements that don't need a master framework.
Scope moved mid-engagement? Reference the signed document, list the adjusted scope, and set a revised fee and timeline — one page with live delta math.
Price the next project before you paper it — line-item services with qty and rate, an optional retainer line, a validity period, and live totals.
Signed the covenant — now commit to performance on the engagements it doesn't restrict: response times, a resolution target, support hours, escalation, and capped service credits on one page.
Bringing in a subcontractor on a client engagement? Include the client non-solicit alongside IP assignment to you, flow-down terms, and fees — one page.
Not sure what to charge outside the restricted market? Calculate a defensible rate range by industry, experience, and service type.
Niche quiz, rate calculator, proposal, quote, contract, SOW, MSA, change order, contractor agreement, termination letter, invoice, and more — every tool on the site, all free.
A non-compete narrows where you can sell — a sharp positioning statement widens where you can. The Consulting Launch Kit gives you one, plus 3 productized offers with pricing, a rewritten bio, a cold-outreach email sequence, a proposal template, and a 30-day plan to land your first 3 clients — personalized to your niche and delivered instantly. Just $29.
Get the launch kit — $29 →One-time · No subscription · 7-day money-back guarantee