[Very Small Case Study] Comparing the 4 main plagiarism checkers ✅

[Jerk55]

With millions of articles published daily and more still getting indexed. There are chances of using the same phrase coming up with contents

Which doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things. I understand why you'd want to publish "perfect" "100% unique" articles, but a little duplicate content doesn't hurt.

 

[Topiano]

Which doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things. I understand why you'd want to publish "perfect" "100% unique" articles, but a little duplicate content doesn't hurt.

I wasn’t going to have at 100% free all time.

 

[PHPInjected]

Which doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things. I understand why you'd want to publish "perfect" "100% unique" articles, but a little duplicate content doesn't hurt.

Depends on how much of a percentage we're talking about. A lot of the time, the plagiarism checker's logic will bring up a match that is only 62% similar to your sentence, which will bring give you 2-4% plagiarism. However, sometimes the sentences in question aren't even talking about the same thing, just using the same words or sentence structure.

All in all, it varies.

 

[Jerk55]

Depends on how much of a percentage we're talking about. A lot of the time, the plagiarism checker's logic will bring up a match that is only 62% similar to your sentence, which will bring give you 2-4% plagiarism. However, sometimes the sentences in question aren't even talking about the same thing, just using the same words or sentence structure.

All in all, it varies.

True. I think uniqueness is overrated, though. Just write naturally and share your ideas with the world.

 

[Jerk55]

I wasn’t going to have at 100% free all time.

Don't understand what you mean...but gave you a like

 

[SirLouen]

Very interesting analysis,

QueText seems to be rocking nowadays. The only problem is how costly it is, if you don't use this intensively.

I suppose that you use this a lot if you work with 3rd party writers to check the quality of their work.

Personally, I only use it when I pick expired content or when I do spin, which in the past few months I've stopped with the rise of AI text.

Any other uses?

 

[PHPInjected]

Oh I also forgot to mention that I used articles from all different niches. Don’t think that bares any difference, but small detail.

 

[PHPInjected]

Very interesting analysis,

QueText seems to be rocking nowadays. The only problem is how costly it is, if you don't use this intensively.

I suppose that you use this a lot if you work with 3rd party writers to check the quality of their work.

Personally, I only use it when I pick expired content or when I do spin, which in the past few months I've stopped with the rise of AI text.

Any other uses?

You can scrape content/articles with something like Scrapebox's Article Scraper. With this, you can scrape an article in another language and have it translated in the plugin.



You can then take the article(s) that you scrape to QueText & run it through the plagiarism checker. You can also check to see if it's indexed or being used anywhere, but that's another use.

 

[4s_7]

I have used Grammarly and quetext. I will always prefer quetext over Grammarly.

 

[welie]

Every tried running with 1text.com ?

it’s my writers nightmare so I stopped using it and move to quetext .

1text is the absolute best plagiarism checker. Hands down nothing ever comes close to it. Only if it weren't closed down to people outside of Russia.
And yeah true about it being a nightmare. It sometimes even detects plagiarism in MY OWN articles and spits out the URLs that I used for research. At the same time, running QueText on the same article lists 0% plagiarism.

 

[SirLouen]

You can then take the article(s) that you scrape to QueText & run it through the plagiarism checker. You can also check to see if it's indexed or being used anywhere, but that's another use.

I forgot the popular trick of translating. I've never liked it but it's true that is very useful and this fits very good.

1text is th

1text > quetext?

Maybe @PHPInjected can add it to the test with the same texts used back in the OP

 

[PHPInjected]

I forgot the popular trick of translating. I've never liked it but it's true that is very useful and this fits very good.


1text > quetext?

Maybe @PHPInjected can add it to the test with the same texts used back in the OP

I've used that method, but I also wasn't completely fond of it. I actually enjoy writing content (when I do) as it scratches the creative itch that I have.


@welie So, I read that and decided to run all three articles through the 1text plagiarism checker:

Article 1:




Article 2:






Article 3:



Results:

So, Article 1 returned 100% unique in comparison to QueText returning 87% and Grammarly returning 92% unique. Article 2 returned 74% uniqueness while Quetext returned 73% uniqueness, Grammarly returned 86% uniqueness, and SmallSEOTools returning 91%. Here's where things got interesting, article 3 returned only a 54% uniqueness level in comparison to Quetext returning 92%, Grammarly returning 93%, and SmallSEOTools returning 98%.


I've gotta say 1Text Plagiarism checker really surprised me here returning similar results to Quetext & Grammarly. Picking up some of the same sentence fragments as well.

The only downsides are:

- There's a timer set to 290 seconds. So you have to wait 290 seconds and the timer counts down every time you run an article through.
- There's also a character limit, you can run somewhere around 3 articles per day. Not bad for a free option.

 

[SirLouen]

I've gotta say 1Text Plagiarism checker really surprised me here returning similar results to Quetext & Grammarly. Picking up some of the same sentence fragments as well.

Amazing. Got to say that 1text went completely under the hood. I've heard of it in this forum now and then, but never took the time to test it.

 

[PHPInjected]

Amazing. Got to say that 1text went completely under the hood. I've heard of it in this forum now and then, but never took the time to test it.

I don't recall ever hearing about them, if I'm being completely honest. 1Text went around my radar entirely. However, I assume they'll at least get a few more premium memberships bought just because of the testing done on this thread provided their pricing structure is acceptable.

I'm not aware of the pricing comparisons between Grammarly & QueText vs 1Text's pricing plan. Though, 1Text user interface and the plagiarism output results are on-par with the main plagiarism checkers, for anyone reading this.

 

[SirLouen]

However, I assume they'll at least get a few more premium memberships bought just because of the testing done on this thread provided their pricing structure is acceptable.

Personally, I hate how QueText is articulated

Check 1Text I love it, the way Copyscape have been doing for ages and it's really fine for me (credits for use, no monthly subs)
Grammarly is also a monthly sub, but it has value if you think on the main function (writting better). I'm currently using LanguageTool because it has more languages (Spanish + English), so for me Grammarly is not an option anymore (I used it for many years though)

So basically seeing all this, it's a discovery for me this new tool. I will put it in my favs and probably ditch Copyscape as soon as I run out of credits (I will test both simultaneously for a time but I'm not using this kind of tools lately as I used to in the past)

 

[bymenn]

Send the articles, I'll have them checked through Writerzen's checker

 

[PinguSpy]

Yes, been tested all different type of plagarism checkers and I end up with Quetext.

Quetext seems more straight compared to others.

That’s why I have my own setup such.. if the article plagarism % is under 30% according to Quetext, then the article is considered unique and ready to post.

 

[sienna]

OP, thank you for bringing up such an interesting point of comparison.
Grammarly Premium has worked flawlessly for me in scientific articles,
I'm considering Copyscape, but it might not be necessary.

 

[korni]

Here is another one from me: EasyBib.

I think it was Morten, the guy from PassiveIncomeGeek, who recommended it.

I haven't tested it personally, but it's probably worth a shot to try out since it has a 3-day free trial.

 

[HustleTong]

Impressive. Copyscape used to be the industry standard for a long time.
Quetext is definitely better