The best 7 IB websites
Are you an IB student looking for resources in your academic journey? This page contains the 7 best tools and websites for the IB Diploma, with thorough comparisons between them.
Detailed comparisons
What is each platform?
Brief programmatic summaries for all tracked IB tools in this hub.
What is Marksy?
Marksy is an IB-focused grading and feedback platform built for rubric-first draft iteration across IA, EE, TOK, oral, and past-paper practice workflows.
What is RevisionDojo?
RevisionDojo is an IB revision platform centered on question practice, exam prep resources, and study workflows for students preparing for IB assessments.
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.
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.
What is Save My Exams?
Save My Exams is a revision-content platform that provides exam notes, topic questions, and past-paper style study materials across multiple exam boards including IB.
What is Kognity?
Kognity is a school-oriented digital IB learning platform combining textbook content, classroom assignments, and progress analytics for teachers and students.
What is ChatGPT?
ChatGPT is a general-purpose AI assistant used for writing and study support across many domains, including IB tasks when configured with user prompts.
Feature comparison table
One shared feature dataset across all platforms. Marksy is highlighted as the benchmark column.
| Feature | RevisionDojo | Clastify | Revision Village | Save My Exams | Kognity | ChatGPT | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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?Public pricing appears in multiple funnels: Plus around $17/mo billed $408/2 years and Pro around $19/mo billed $456/2 years, while premium/support bundles are often cited much higher ($139-$198/month range). Tutoring is separate at $29/hour. | ~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). | ~Partial?Offer-led pricing varies by region and promo. Public pricing config includes multiple USD monthly anchors ($30/$40/$50/$60) and annual anchors ($72/$96/$120/$144). | ×No?No fixed self-serve public sticker price; schools are usually quoted custom per-student annual contracts. | ~Partial?Free tier is available, with paid plans publicly listed around Plus ($20/month) and Pro ($200/month) plus Business/Enterprise tiers. |
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. | ~Partial?Free entry exists, but recurring value for grading-heavy workflows is less clearly documented. | ×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. | ~Partial?Reasonable revision-membership value, but not optimized for repeated grading and feedback workflows. | ×No?School-led annual pricing can be heavier for individual students seeking frequent personal grading. | ~Partial?Accessible monthly plans exist, but pricing is not specifically optimized around structured IB grading cycles. |
Publicly transparent pricing ?Lower uncertainty at evaluation time. | Strong?Public monthly pricing with free, student, and teacher tiers. | ?Unclear?Full public pricing matrix is limited on marketing pages. | Strong?Public review pricing is visible for IA/EE/TOK review offerings. | Strong?Membership and plan framing is publicly visible. | ~Partial?Membership flow is public, though full matrix detail can vary by funnel. | ?Unclear?Pricing is per-student per-year but final costs are quote-based. | Strong?Public plan structure (Free/Plus/Pro/Business/Enterprise) is listed. |
IB rubric-first grading workflow ?Purpose-built for criterion-level grading, not generic advice. | Strong?Criterion-first scoring and rubric-oriented grading UX. | ~Partial?Mentions AI grading, but study stack is the dominant positioning. | ~Partial?Review service provides predicted scores and improvement guidance. | ×No?Positioned around practice content, not draft grading workflows. | ×No?Public value proposition is revision content over coursework grading. | ~Partial?Assessment support exists, but grading-first workflow is not core positioning. | ~Partial?Can grade with prompts, but IB rubric fidelity depends on user setup. |
IA / EE / TOK submission support ?Designed for core IB assessed writing workflows. | Strong?Built for IA, EE, TOK submission workflows. | ~Partial?IB-wide messaging exists, but per-workflow grading depth is not fully public. | Strong?Public review options include IA, EE, and TOK review tracks. | ~Partial?Expanding resources exist, but primary product is exam prep content. | ~Partial?Supports IB study prep, but not a grading-first IA/EE/TOK workflow. | ~Partial?Broad IB subject support with classroom workflows. | ~Partial?Can support all task types with prompts, not dedicated workflows. |
Batch submission workflow ?Multiple drafts in one flow saves turnaround time. | Strong?Batch workflows support up to 15 submissions at once. | ?Unclear?Bulk submission specifics are not clearly documented on public pages. | ×No?Public workflow is submission-by-submission review. | ×No?No public bulk submission grading workflow. | ×No?No public bulk grading workflow. | ~Partial?Assignment workflows exist in a school/classroom context. | ×No?Public product is not a batch grading pipeline. |
Built-in oral / IO practice ?Keeps speaking prep and grading in one stack. | Strong?5-20 paid-tier oral/IO runs monthly. | ?Unclear?Public pages emphasize exam prep over oral-specific loops. | ×No?Not marketed as an oral/IO practice system. | ×No?Not publicly positioned as oral/IO practice software. | ×No?No public oral/IO feedback workflow. | ×No?Not publicly positioned around oral/IO practice loops. | ~Partial?Can simulate speaking practice, but no IB-structured oral workflow out of the box. |
Past-paper grading/practice mode ?Supports exam-style practice inside the same product. | Strong?100-400 paid-tier questions monthly. | Strong?Exam prep and question practice are core value props. | ×No?Past-paper workflow is not a public core feature. | Strong?Past-paper and mock-exam practice are core parts of the product. | Strong?Past papers and exam-style mock practice are core features. | ~Partial?Practice center and assessment features exist, but not pitched as IA/EE grading. | ~Partial?Possible with manual setup; no dedicated IB past-paper pipeline. |
Built-in AI-detection checks ?Integrity checks are native, not a separate purchase. | Strong?20-50 paid-tier AI checks monthly. | ?Unclear?Detection capability visibility is limited in public product pages. | ?Unclear?No clearly advertised built-in AI-detection workflow. | ×No?No public built-in AI-detection feature positioning. | ×No?No public AI-detection product positioning. | ×No?No public AI-detection workflow positioning. | ×No?No first-party academic AI-detection checker in ChatGPT product flows. |
Export-ready feedback output ?Easy to keep records and track progression. | Strong?Feedback outputs can be reused and shared for iteration. | ?Unclear?No clear public export workflow documentation. | ~Partial?Delivers detailed review output for each paid submission. | ×No?No public workflow centered on exportable coursework feedback. | ×No?Not positioned as an exportable grading feedback platform. | ~Partial?Classroom assignment and data workflows are available in-platform. | ~Partial?Outputs are copy/exportable as chat content, without structured grading reports by default. |
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. | Strong?Publicly positioned around revision questions and exam prep. | ~Partial?Leans on exemplars more than broad revision questionbanks. | Strong?Strong questionbank and markscheme/video-solution coverage. | Strong?Revision notes, exam questions, and topic tests are public feature pillars. | Strong?Publicly advertises a 10,000+ question bank and auto-corrected assignments. | ×No?No official IB questionbank library bundled by default. |
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. | ~Partial?Includes exam prep content; human-review model is not the primary public story. | Strong?Core value prop: real examiner review plus exemplars. | ~Partial?Resource-led support rather than ongoing review workflow. | ~Partial?Strong revision content catalog, but not a submission review service. | ×No?Not positioned as an examiner-review marketplace. | ×No?Not an examiner review marketplace. |
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. | ~Partial?Teacher-oriented paths exist, but analytics depth is not fully surfaced publicly. | ×No?Not publicly framed as teacher analytics software. | ×No?Not positioned as analytics software for class-level interventions. | ~Partial?Teacher tools exist, but class analytics depth is secondary publicly. | Strong?Real-time student progress and teaching-impact analytics are core messaging. | ×No?No built-in IB class analytics dashboard for coursework. |
Free entry path ?Students can start fast without procurement delays. | Strong?5 complete gradings monthly on free access. | Strong?Publicly advertises free start paths. | Strong?Public join-for-free path is available. | ~Partial?Open-study access exists with premium membership upsell. | Strong?Public free-join entry path is available. | ~Partial?Free access trial path exists, but full use is school subscription-led. | Strong?Public free plan exists with paid upgrades for higher limits and models. |
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 start from the main landing page flow. | Strong?Students can self-serve and buy individual review services. | Strong?Student self-serve membership flow is public. | Strong?Students can self-serve study access. | ×No?Typical adoption flow is school-led rather than individual self-serve. | Strong?Individuals can self-serve account creation and usage. |
IB-specific positioning ?Sharper product fit typically means less prompt engineering. | Strong?Positioned as an IB-specific grading workflow product. | Strong?Strong IB-first positioning across the homepage. | Strong?Strong IB exam/examiner framing in public messaging. | Strong?IB exam prep is the core market positioning. | ~Partial?Supports IB, but also serves multiple exam boards. | Strong?Explicit IB DP product positioning and collaboration claims. | ×No?General assistant, not IB-specific by default. |
Winner pick