What is Kognity?
Kognity is a school-oriented digital IB learning platform combining textbook content, classroom assignments, and progress analytics for teachers and students.
Kognity
ClastifyKognity vs Clastify
Source freshness: dated public claims, last updated .
Do you want to know wether Kognity or Clastify is best for IB? This page provides a through comparison of both tools.
TL;DR
Last updated:
- •TL;DR: In Kognity vs Clastify, Marksy is included as a third benchmark and usually wins on grading workflow depth and repeatability.
- •Kognity and Clastify 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 Clastify?
Clastify is an IB coursework support platform known for exemplar libraries and paid examiner-style review services for IA, EE, and TOK submissions.
Features comparison
| Feature |  Kognity |  Clastify | |
|---|---|---|---|
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. | ×No?No fixed self-serve public sticker price; schools are usually quoted custom per-student annual contracts. | ~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. |
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?School-led annual pricing can be heavier for individual students seeking frequent personal grading. | ×No?Per-submission review pricing can become expensive for frequent weekly draft cycles. |
Publicly transparent pricing ?Lower uncertainty at evaluation time. | Strong?Public monthly pricing with free, student, and teacher tiers. | ?Unclear?Pricing is per-student per-year but final costs are quote-based. | Strong?Public review pricing is visible for IA/EE/TOK review offerings. |
IB rubric-first grading workflow ?Purpose-built for criterion-level grading, not generic advice. | Strong?Criterion-first scoring and rubric-oriented grading UX. | ~Partial?Assessment support exists, but grading-first workflow is not core positioning. | ~Partial?Review service provides predicted scores and improvement guidance. |
IA / EE / TOK submission support ?Designed for core IB assessed writing workflows. | Strong?Built for IA, EE, TOK submission workflows. | ~Partial?Broad IB subject support with classroom workflows. | Strong?Public review options include IA, EE, and TOK review tracks. |
Batch submission workflow ?Multiple drafts in one flow saves turnaround time. | Strong?Batch workflows support up to 15 submissions at once. | ~Partial?Assignment workflows exist in a school/classroom context. | ×No?Public workflow is submission-by-submission review. |
Built-in oral / IO practice ?Keeps speaking prep and grading in one stack. | Strong?5-20 paid-tier oral/IO runs monthly. | ×No?Not publicly positioned around oral/IO practice loops. | ×No?Not marketed as an oral/IO practice system. |
Past-paper grading/practice mode ?Supports exam-style practice inside the same product. | Strong?100-400 paid-tier questions monthly. | ~Partial?Practice center and assessment features exist, but not pitched as IA/EE grading. | ×No?Past-paper workflow is not a public core feature. |
Built-in AI-detection checks ?Integrity checks are native, not a separate purchase. | Strong?20-50 paid-tier AI checks monthly. | ×No?No public AI-detection workflow positioning. | ?Unclear?No clearly advertised built-in AI-detection workflow. |
Export-ready feedback output ?Easy to keep records and track progression. | Strong?Feedback outputs can be reused and shared for iteration. | ~Partial?Classroom assignment and data workflows are available in-platform. | ~Partial?Delivers detailed review output for each paid submission. |
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 advertises a 10,000+ question bank and auto-corrected assignments. | ~Partial?Leans on exemplars more than broad revision questionbanks. |
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. | ×No?Not positioned as an examiner-review marketplace. | Strong?Core value prop: real examiner review plus exemplars. |
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. | Strong?Real-time student progress and teaching-impact analytics are core messaging. | ×No?Not publicly framed as teacher analytics software. |
Free entry path ?Students can start fast without procurement delays. | Strong?5 complete gradings monthly on free access. | ~Partial?Free access trial path exists, but full use is school subscription-led. | Strong?Public join-for-free path is available. |
Low-friction self-serve onboarding ?Individuals can get value quickly without school setup. | Strong?Students can sign up directly and start without school procurement. | ×No?Typical adoption flow is school-led rather than individual self-serve. | Strong?Students can self-serve and buy individual review services. |
IB-specific positioning ?Sharper product fit typically means less prompt engineering. | Strong?Positioned as an IB-specific grading workflow product. | Strong?Explicit IB DP product positioning and collaboration claims. | Strong?Strong IB exam/examiner framing in public messaging. |
Winner pick
Why not try the winner?
More Kognity comparisons
More Clastify comparisons
Find the best alternatives to Kognity and Clastify
Frequently Asked Questions
What makes Marksy different from Kognity or Clastify?
Marksy stays purpose-built for repeatable grading workflows and is rated strong on regular-use price value (vs no for Kognity and no for Clastify). 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. Kognity -> No fixed self-serve public sticker price; schools are usually quoted custom per-student annual contracts. 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. Against Kognity, Marksy leads 12 rows with key edges in Price value for regular IB grading and Built-in oral / IO practice. Against Clastify, Marksy leads 9 rows with key edges in Price value for regular IB grading 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 Kognity vs Clastify at 4-7, while Marksy still leads as the practical grading-first alternative.