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.
Revision Village
ClastifyRevision Village vs Clastify
Source freshness: dated public claims, last updated .
- Revision Village questionbank
- Revision Village membership
- Clastify review page
- Clastify review pricing bundle (page script)
Do you want to know wether Revision Village or Clastify is best for IB? This page provides a through comparison of both tools.
TL;DR
Last updated:
- •TL;DR: In Revision Village vs Clastify, Marksy is included as a third benchmark and usually wins on grading workflow depth and repeatability.
- •Revision Village 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 |  Revision Village |  Clastify | |
|---|---|---|---|
| General | |||
IB oriented ?IB-first workflows reduce prompt overhead and improve rubric fit. | Strong?Positioned as an IB-specific grading workflow product. | Strong?IB exam prep is the core market positioning. | Strong?Strong IB exam/examiner framing in public messaging. |
Affordable ?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. | ×No?Public Gold snapshots include subject plans at $70 monthly and higher full-suite plans. | ~Partial?Base access can start around $12.99/month, with per-submission review pricing (TOK $44.99, IA $49.99, EE $59.99). |
Has free tier ?Students can start immediately without procurement or upfront payment. | Strong?5 complete gradings monthly on free access. | ~Partial?Open-study access exists with premium membership upsell. | ~Partial?Has free tier but very limited. |
Transparent pricing ?Lower uncertainty at evaluation time. | Strong?Public monthly pricing with free, student, and teacher tiers. | Strong?Membership and plan framing is publicly visible. | Strong?Public review pricing is visible for IA/EE/TOK review offerings. |
| Assessment grading | |||
IA / EE / TOK grading support ?Designed for core IB assessed writing workflows. | Strong?Built for IA, EE, TOK submission workflows. | ×No?No dedicated IA/EE/TOK grading support workflow is provided. | Strong?Public review options include IA, EE, and TOK review tracks. |
Criterion level feedback ?Purpose-built for criterion-level grading, not generic advice. | Strong?Criterion-first scoring and rubric-oriented grading UX. | ×No?Positioned around practice content, not draft grading workflows. | Strong?Review service provides predicted scores and criterion-linked improvement guidance. |
AI detection ?Integrity checks are native, not a separate purchase. | Strong?20-50 paid-tier AI checks monthly. | ×No?No public built-in AI-detection feature positioning. | ×No?No built-in AI-detection workflow is offered. |
Specific tips ?Actionable next steps speed up draft improvement cycles. | Strong?Actionable criterion-level tips are paired with Marksy TODO tasks so feedback turns into trackable next steps. | ×No?No specific grading-tip workflow is offered. | ×No?No always-on specific-tip workflow beyond one-off review comments. |
Quick ?Fast turnaround keeps revision momentum high between submissions. | Strong?Fast AI-assisted turnaround supports repeat submission loops. | ×No?Not a fast IA/EE/TOK grading workflow; speed claims focus on exam-practice content instead. | ×No?Human examiner review can take longer than instant AI-first loops. |
Human review ?Human review can help edge cases but usually adds time and cost. | ×No?Focuses on AI-assisted grading workflow over human examiner reviews. | ×No?Not positioned as a human examiner review service. | Strong?Core value prop: real examiner review plus exemplars. |
Good price for assessment grading ?Lower cost per repeated grading cycle matters more than one-off pricing. | Strong?Subscription pricing keeps repeated retries cheaper than per-review models. | ×No?Pricing is optimized for revision content, not assessment grading services. | ×No?Per-submission review pricing can become expensive for frequent weekly draft cycles. |
| Textbooks and simulations | |||
Online textbooks ?Useful for concept refreshers before running assessment feedback loops. | Strong?Includes online textbook-style revision content alongside grading workflows. | ×No?No online textbook product is offered. | ×No?No online textbook product is offered. |
Hundreds of simulations to learn concepts ?Interactive simulation depth improves understanding before drafting. | Strong?Public simulations hub includes hundreds of IB learning simulations. | ×No?No public simulation library is a core product pillar. | ×No?No public simulations library is positioned. |
Available for free ?Free learning content removes friction for everyday revision. | Strong?Core simulation and revision resources are publicly accessible. | ~Partial?Some open-study access exists before premium membership upgrades. | ~Partial?Some resources are accessible with free accounts; detailed reviews are paid. |
| Oral practice | |||
Practice and get feedback ?Oral practice should include structured scoring feedback. | Strong?Built-in oral practice returns structured feedback per run. | ×No?Not publicly positioned as an oral-practice feedback product. | ×No?Not marketed as an oral/IO practice system. |
Affordable oral practice ?Predictable oral-practice costs matter when students rehearse frequently. | Strong?Oral practice is included in plan limits, not charged per attempt. | ×No?No affordable oral-practice workflow is offered due to lack of oral support. | ×No?No affordable oral-practice workflow is offered due to lack of oral support. |
| Questionbank | |||
Practice IB questions ?Question practice is valuable when linked to criterion-aware feedback. | ~Partial?Question practice is available through past papers only; there is no dedicated standalone questionbank. | Strong?Strong IB questionbank and markscheme/video-solution coverage. | ×No?No dedicated IB question-practice bank is provided. |
| Past papers | |||
Past papers available ?Past papers are a core requirement for exam-season practice. | Strong?Past-paper and exam-style practice are built into the product. | ×No?No first-party past-paper library is consistently available. | ×No?Past-paper workflow is not a public core feature. |
Practice past papers questions with AI ?AI-assisted past-paper feedback shortens the time between attempts. | Strong?Past-paper question feedback is AI-assisted with retry loops. | ×No?Past-paper practice is content-led, not AI grading-led. | ×No?No dedicated AI past-paper practice workflow is positioned. |
| Teacher features | |||
Grade assessments in large batches ?Batch grading throughput matters for teacher workloads. | Strong?Batch workflows support up to 15 submissions at once. | ×No?No public bulk submission grading workflow. | ×No?Public workflow is submission-by-submission review. |
Export grading results in bulk ?Exportable outputs simplify moderation and record-keeping. | Strong?Feedback outputs can be reused and shared for iteration. | ×No?No public workflow centered on exportable grading outputs. | ~Partial?Delivers detailed output per submission, but no public bulk export flow. |
Winner pick
Why not try the winner?
More Revision Village comparisons
More Clastify comparisons
Find the best alternatives to Revision Village and Clastify
Frequently Asked Questions
What makes Marksy different from Revision Village or Clastify?
Marksy stays purpose-built for repeatable grading workflows and is rated strong on assessment-grading price value (vs no for Revision Village and no for Clastify). Pricing: Marksy -> $0 entry with 5 full gradings/month, then paid student plans from $14.99/month. Revision Village -> Public Gold snapshots include subject plans at $70 monthly and higher full-suite plans. Clastify -> Base access can start around $12.99/month, with per-submission review pricing (TOK $44.99, IA $49.99, EE $59.99). Against Revision Village, Marksy leads 17 rows with key edges in IA / EE / TOK grading support and Criterion level feedback. Against Clastify, Marksy leads 16 rows with key edges in Specific tips and Good price for assessment grading.
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 Revision Village vs Clastify at 1-5, while Marksy still leads as the practical grading-first alternative.