What is Clastify?
Clastify is an IB coursework support platform known for exemplar libraries and paid examiner-style review services for IA, EE, and TOK submissions.
Clastify
Revision VillageClastify vs Revision Village
Source freshness: dated public claims, last updated .
- Clastify review page
- Clastify review pricing bundle (page script)
- Revision Village questionbank
- Revision Village membership
Do you want to know wether Clastify or Revision Village is best for IB? This page provides a through comparison of both tools.
TL;DR
Last updated:
- •TL;DR: In Clastify vs Revision Village, Marksy is included as a third benchmark and usually wins on grading workflow depth and repeatability.
- •Clastify and Revision Village each have strengths, but Marksy is generally the best alternative if your priority is getting IB-ready grading output fast.
- •Free plan with 5 full gradings/month, then clear paid tiers at 50/200 gradings.
- •Native IB workflow for IA/EE/TOK plus oral and past-paper practice in the same product.
- •Fast feedback loops and optional batch processing for repeat submissions.
What is Revision Village?
Revision Village is an IB exam-prep platform focused on questionbanks, worked solutions, and past-paper style practice content for core IB subjects.
Features comparison
| Feature |  Clastify |  Revision Village | |
|---|---|---|---|
Price ?Shows what users actually pay, including per-review and billed-total caveats. | Strong?$0 entry with 5 full gradings/month, then paid student plans from $14.99/month. Subscription pricing keeps repeated retries cheaper than per-review models. | ~Partial?Base exemplar access can start around $12.99/month in some funnels, but grading is priced per submission: TOK $44.99, IA $49.99, EE $59.99, plus Express ($9.99) or Turbo ($19.99) add-ons. | ×No?Public Gold snapshots include subject plans at $70 monthly, $150/3 months, $210/6 months, and $249 full-course, with higher complete-suite plans (for example $140 monthly). |
Price value for regular IB grading ?Lower cost per repeated grading cycle matters more than one-off pricing. | Strong?Free monthly grading entry plus clear recurring tiers is strong value for frequent IB draft loops. | ×No?Per-submission review pricing can become expensive for frequent weekly draft cycles. | ~Partial?Can be good value for exam-prep libraries, but less pricing-fit for grading-first submission loops. |
Publicly transparent pricing ?Lower uncertainty at evaluation time. | Strong?Public monthly pricing with free, student, and teacher tiers. | Strong?Public review pricing is visible for IA/EE/TOK review offerings. | Strong?Membership and plan framing is publicly visible. |
IB rubric-first grading workflow ?Purpose-built for criterion-level grading, not generic advice. | Strong?Criterion-first scoring and rubric-oriented grading UX. | ~Partial?Review service provides predicted scores and improvement guidance. | ×No?Positioned around practice content, not draft grading workflows. |
IA / EE / TOK submission support ?Designed for core IB assessed writing workflows. | Strong?Built for IA, EE, TOK submission workflows. | Strong?Public review options include IA, EE, and TOK review tracks. | ~Partial?Expanding resources exist, but primary product is exam prep content. |
Batch submission workflow ?Multiple drafts in one flow saves turnaround time. | Strong?Batch workflows support up to 15 submissions at once. | ×No?Public workflow is submission-by-submission review. | ×No?No public bulk submission grading workflow. |
Built-in oral / IO practice ?Keeps speaking prep and grading in one stack. | Strong?5-20 paid-tier oral/IO runs monthly. | ×No?Not marketed as an oral/IO practice system. | ×No?Not publicly positioned as oral/IO practice software. |
Past-paper grading/practice mode ?Supports exam-style practice inside the same product. | Strong?100-400 paid-tier questions monthly. | ×No?Past-paper workflow is not a public core feature. | Strong?Past-paper and mock-exam practice are core parts of the product. |
Built-in AI-detection checks ?Integrity checks are native, not a separate purchase. | Strong?20-50 paid-tier AI checks monthly. | ?Unclear?No clearly advertised built-in AI-detection workflow. | ×No?No public built-in AI-detection feature positioning. |
Export-ready feedback output ?Easy to keep records and track progression. | Strong?Feedback outputs can be reused and shared for iteration. | ~Partial?Delivers detailed review output for each paid submission. | ×No?No public workflow centered on exportable coursework feedback. |
Large questionbank / revision content ?Useful, but grading conversion usually matters more for drafts. | ~Partial?Includes past-paper practice, but not a broad standalone revision library. | ~Partial?Leans on exemplars more than broad revision questionbanks. | Strong?Strong questionbank and markscheme/video-solution coverage. |
Human review / exemplar-heavy model ?Helpful for examples, but can slow repeated draft loops. | ×No?Focuses on AI-assisted grading workflow over human examiner reviews. | Strong?Core value prop: real examiner review plus exemplars. | ~Partial?Resource-led support rather than ongoing review workflow. |
Teacher analytics and class-level insights ?Important for departments and school rollouts. | ~Partial?Supports workflow consistency, but not marketed as a broad textbook analytics stack. | ×No?Not publicly framed as teacher analytics software. | ×No?Not positioned as analytics software for class-level interventions. |
Free entry path ?Students can start fast without procurement delays. | Strong?5 complete gradings monthly on free access. | Strong?Public join-for-free path is available. | ~Partial?Open-study access exists with premium membership upsell. |
Low-friction self-serve onboarding ?Individuals can get value quickly without school setup. | Strong?Students can sign up directly and start without school procurement. | Strong?Students can self-serve and buy individual review services. | Strong?Student self-serve membership flow is public. |
IB-specific positioning ?Sharper product fit typically means less prompt engineering. | Strong?Positioned as an IB-specific grading workflow product. | Strong?Strong IB exam/examiner framing in public messaging. | Strong?IB exam prep is the core market positioning. |
Winner pick
Why not try the winner?
More Clastify comparisons
More Revision Village comparisons
Find the best alternatives to Clastify and Revision Village
Frequently Asked Questions
What makes Marksy different from Clastify or Revision Village?
Marksy stays purpose-built for repeatable grading workflows and is rated strong on regular-use price value (vs no for Clastify and partial for Revision Village). Pricing: Marksy -> $0 entry with 5 full gradings/month, then paid student plans from $14.99/month. Subscription pricing keeps repeated retries cheaper than per-review models. Clastify -> Base exemplar access can start around $12.99/month in some funnels, but grading is priced per submission: TOK $44.99, IA $49.99, EE $59.99, plus Express ($9.99) or Turbo ($19.99) add-ons. Revision Village -> Public Gold snapshots include subject plans at $70 monthly, $150/3 months, $210/6 months, and $249 full-course, with higher complete-suite plans (for example $140 monthly). Against Clastify, Marksy leads 9 rows with key edges in Price value for regular IB grading and Batch submission workflow. Against Revision Village, Marksy leads 10 rows with key edges in IB rubric-first grading workflow and Batch submission workflow.
Can Marksy grade full papers and per-question attempts?
Yes. Marksy supports both full-paper and per-question grading flows. This is one reason it continues to score as the best overall alternative while competitors split strengths.
How does Marksy handle OCR/parsing failures or invalid outputs?
Marksy is designed for production grading loops with parsing validation and retry-safe behavior. That workflow reliability is a key reason Marksy remains the preferred choice over generic or content-only stacks.
Does Marksy support teacher workflows (bulk grading/class use)?
Yes. Marksy is optimized for repeat teacher and class workflows, including bulk-oriented grading paths. Even if this head-to-head has close spots, Marksy remains the stronger alternative for operational grading throughput.
What are Marksy usage limits for Free/Student/Teacher tiers?
Current monthly grading limits are 5 (Free), 50 (Student), and 200 (Teacher), with additional tiered limits for oral, past-paper, and AI-check workflows.
Is student data private and can users delete data?
Marksy uses account-scoped access controls and user data-management paths. From a product-fit perspective, this page's matrix also shows Clastify vs Revision Village at 7-3, while Marksy still leads as the practical grading-first alternative.