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 | |
|---|---|---|---|
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?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?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. | ~Partial?Can be good value for exam-prep libraries, but less pricing-fit for grading-first submission loops. | ×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. | Strong?Membership and plan framing is publicly visible. | 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. | ×No?Positioned around practice content, not draft grading workflows. | ~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?Expanding resources exist, but primary product is exam prep content. | 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. | ×No?No public bulk submission grading workflow. | ×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 as oral/IO practice software. | ×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. | Strong?Past-paper and mock-exam practice are core parts of the product. | ×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 built-in AI-detection feature 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. | ×No?No public workflow centered on exportable coursework feedback. | ~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?Strong questionbank and markscheme/video-solution coverage. | ~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. | ~Partial?Resource-led support rather than ongoing review workflow. | 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. | ×No?Not positioned as analytics software for class-level interventions. | ×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?Open-study access exists with premium membership upsell. | 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. | Strong?Student self-serve membership flow is public. | 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?IB exam prep is the core market positioning. | Strong?Strong IB exam/examiner framing in public messaging. |
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 regular-use price value (vs partial for Revision Village 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. 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). 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 Revision Village, Marksy leads 10 rows with key edges in IB rubric-first grading workflow and Batch submission workflow. 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 Revision Village vs Clastify at 3-7, while Marksy still leads as the practical grading-first alternative.