When working with online paper checking services, sometimes all you want is a tool that will perform its main functions, and that will not cause you to grind your teeth. Like, you do not need interactive trinkets, a neat design, timers, 24/7 support—all you want is your papers checked correctly, and an easy-to-use service. For everyone who values simplicity and functionality, there is a nice online plagiarism checker that does exactly what it was designed for: detects “pirated” texts. Meet a convenient and reliable tool for checking your papers for plagiarism, with some unique features.

Plagiarism-Checking Algorithm

Comparison base

What surprised us the most is that instead of relying on Google, Bing, or other search engines, operates with its own page-indexing system—at least this is what the service’s management states.

It looks like checks papers for plagiarism via the Internet, and does not possess its own base of samples. We say “it looks like,” because the description on the website is not very clear; it offers users to choose one of two methods of comparison: Internet news (whatever this means), and the user’s previously-checked works.

Comparison algorithms

Judging from the tests we conducted, if your text contains nine and more words in a row matching with a source, considers it to be plagiarism. It is yet unclear whether the plagiarism checker is capable of seeing through synonyms and changes in word order since various tests have shown different results. Anyways, you can check it out yourself

Unfortunately, sometimes sees plagiarism where there is none, because of the pretty short word chains recognized as plagiarism, frequently used words, phrases, or common knowledge may be marked by the system. So, if your paper contains phrases like, “Hello, darling. How are you?” get ready for possible false alarms.

Words Order
Recognition of the significant parts of a paper

Unfortunately, citations and quotes are not recognized by the plagiarism checker, so it simply marks them as plagiarism. Moreover, even the direct quotes within the quotation marks are still considered plagiarism, which is weird, since even a number of lower quality plagiarism checkers “understand” quotation marks. Supposedly, it can be explained by the suggestion that is mostly oriented on SEO-specialists, who avoid any repetitions in content regardless of its type.

Algorithm evaluation performs well when it comes to detecting any matches within the submitted text and references found throughout the Internet, but it seriously lacks the ability to recognize quotes and citations.


Time of checking

In terms of speed, shows rather common results; it usually takes the program about 1-3 minutes to complete the check, which is decent efficiency among plagiarism checkers. Besides, the interface of the checker is equipped with a timer showing how much time there is approximately left till the check is over, and with a progress bar displaying the percentage of how much text has been scanned. Such little details make it more comfortable to wait for the check results, and shows the developers’ intent to make using as pleasant and convenient as possible.

At the same time, there is no way you can run several scans simultaneously, The program keeps a record of your checks in your personal cabinet, and it is convenient in terms of tracking which papers you have already scanned, and which you have not, but having to run one scan after another, combined with the time the program needs to check each paper, slightly spoils the impression of using

Report convenience

Judging from the tests we conducted, if your text contains nine and more words in a row matching with a source, considers it to be plagiarism. It is yet unclear whether the plagiarism checker is capable of seeing through synonyms and changes in word order since various tests have shown different results. Anyways, you can check it out yourself

It has been mentioned that the system recognizes chains of nine and more matching words as plagiarism; well, the report after the scan is finished highlights only these word chains, as if in between them there cannot be any plagiarism at all. But at least it highlights text fragments with plagiarism—during our tests, we have seen numerous plagiarism checkers that did not bother implementing this important and obvious function, and luckily is not like them. If you hover a cursor over each of the highlighted areas, you will see a list of sources, in which the program has found matching words and phrases. Moreover, if you open any of these sources, you will see the fragments where these matches have been found—this is super-convenient, and we do not understand how this has not yet become the golden standard for all plagiarism checkers in the world.

Usability evaluation is rather pleasant and convenient to use, although its rather mediocre scanning time is a bit disappointing.

Website’s Functionality

Text input methods supports any text input method you can think of. In particular, you can simply insert a URL, copy-paste your text into the special field, or upload it via one of the common file formats (.txt, .doc, .docx, .pdf).

Report download

There is no way you can download a plagiarism report (which is weird), but you can send a link to it to your teacher after the scan is finished.

Working with the report

You cannot adjust the function of checking quotations and references (and, to be honest, does not recognize them anyways—the service does not specialize in academic papers, so if your work is full of quotes or source names, you might have them marked as plagiarism), although there is an option to exclude some of the sources from the list of the checked ones; in other words, you can turn off the function of checking plagiarism in the sources from which you have taken the majority of quotations. Oh yes, and if you want to make corrections, you will have to start the scan all over again.

Functionality evaluation does lack several important features, such as the recognition of quotations and references, although it can be countered by manipulations with the list of plagiarized sources.

Prices, Guarantee, Safety

Price of the service

Unfortunately, there is no free version available to users; your best option when using would probably be to deposit some money to your account, and spend them on checks whenever you need it. Alas, the price list on the website is confusing, and it is difficult to understand exactly how much money one needs to pay for this or that amount of checks.

Money back guarantee

You can get your money back within 10 days after using the service if you did not like it.

Usage safety is safe to use, meaning that it does not save scanned works to its base, so you can check your papers as much as you want before sending them to your teacher—the result will be the same all the time.


Loses half the point for the unclear price list.


Overall Evaluation

  • is a nice service in terms of usage convenience; its reports, interface, and working with the lists of sources is convenient to use; in particular, we liked such features as history of scans, highlighting plagiarized parts in the submitted text, and highlighting copied fragments of text in the sources.
  • lacks several important features crucial for plagiarism checkers—for example, the ability to recognize quotations and references.
  • You cannot download the plagiarism report.
  • Indistinct price list.

Visit Site

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *