Skip to main content

Platform Comparison · 2026

EditingTests.com vs TestGorilla

TestGorilla is a broad-spectrum hiring platform. EditingTests.com is built exclusively for editorial talent. Here's what that difference means in practice.

Choose EditingTests.com if

You're hiring editors, proofreaders, writers, or communications professionals and need specialist, defensible benchmarks.

Choose TestGorilla if

You're hiring across many different roles — developers, customer support, sales — and need a general-purpose screening tool.

The bottom line

For editorial roles, a specialist platform with 28 years of benchmark data will always outperform a generalist with 400 generic tests.

Feature-by-Feature Comparison

Feature comparison: EditingTests.com against TestGorilla
Feature EditingTests.com TestGorilla
Editorial specialisation 100% specialist — 7 purpose-built editorial tests General platform — no dedicated editorial tests
Track Changes editing environment ✓ Realistic track-changes editor (ET, FEA) ✗ Not available
Benchmark database 130,000+ candidates over 28 years No editorial benchmark database
Test library 7 specialist editorial assessments 400+ general tests across all disciplines
Proofreading test ✓ Authentic published-style passages Generic attention-to-detail tests only
Industry vocabulary ✓ 4,400+ sector-specific vocabulary banks ✗ Not available
Human expert review ✓ Every open-response result, before release (12hr SLA) ✗ Fully automated only
Anti-cheat measures Fullscreen lock, tab detection, clipboard block, server-side timing Webcam monitoring, IP tracking
Pricing model Pay per credit — no subscription required Annual subscription (Core and Plus are annual-commitment plans)
Starting price From $50 per assessment — credits never expire Core $142/mo, billed annually ($1,704/yr)
Large company pricing Same price per credit regardless of company size Plus from $400/mo ($4,800/yr); Enterprise by quote
Free trial ✓ Try any test free — no account required ✓ Limited free plan (5 tests)
Max tests per assessment Up to 7 specialist tests Max 4 tests per assessment
ATS integrations REST API + native Greenhouse, Lever and Ashby connectors Greenhouse, SmartRecruiters, Workday, BambooHR, Zapier
Candidate results transparency Full percentile report with skill breakdown Score breakdown — no external benchmark
Scoring transparency Full scoring guides available Opaque — quiz guides not viewable
Setup time Under 5 minutes to first invitation Fast setup for standard assessments
Founded 1998 — 28 years of editorial data 2019

Specialist vs Generalist: Why It Matters for Editorial Hiring

TestGorilla's 400+ test library is genuinely impressive — for hiring developers, marketers, and customer support agents. For editorial roles, quantity works against you. A platform built around cognitive aptitude and verbal reasoning is not the same as one built to test whether a candidate can competently apply Chicago style, identify a dangling modifier, or restructure a sentence without changing its meaning.

EditingTests.com's seven assessments were created by practising editorial professionals, refined over 28 years of live testing, and benchmarked against a database of 130,000+ real candidates. That benchmark is the critical differentiator: it tells you not just whether a candidate scored 72%, but whether 72% puts them in the top quartile or the bottom half for their role.

How scoring is explained here

Every open-response result — Writing, Editing, Proofreading and the MS Word practical — is reviewed by a human editor before it reaches you, and the report shows the score for each dimension of the rubric rather than a single number.

The rubric itself is published on our methodology page, so you can see what a mark was awarded for before you send a candidate the test, not after.

The Pricing Problem

Free tier Try any test free — no account $0/mo — 10 credits monthly, 5 tests
Entry paid plan $50 per assessment Core — $142/mo, $1,704 billed annually
Mid plan $50 per assessment Plus — from $400/mo, from $4,800 annually
Largest published plan $50 per assessment Enterprise — by quote, not published
Annual lock-in required? No — pay as you go Yes — Core and Plus are annual-commitment plans
Credits expire? Never N/A — subscription model

A Subscription You Commit To For a Year

TestGorilla's paid plans are annual-commitment subscriptions: Core at $142 a month is billed as $1,704 for the year, and Plus starts at $400 a month, or $4,800. That is the cost whether you assess two hundred candidates or two — the commitment is to the year, not to the hiring you actually do.

EditingTests.com charges per assessment credit, regardless of company size. A team of 5 pays the same rate as a team of 500. Credits never expire, so seasonal hiring costs no more than steady hiring, and there is nothing to cancel. You can try any test free with no account required.

Which model suits you comes down to volume. If you assess candidates continuously all year, a subscription may well work out cheaper. If your editorial hiring comes in bursts — a few roles, a few times a year — you are paying for the twelve months either way.

Where EditingTests.com Has No Equivalent

Track Changes Editor

Our Editing Test uses a genuine track-changes environment that mirrors Word and Google Docs. Candidates mark changes the way they would on the job. TestGorilla has no equivalent.

28-Year Benchmark Database

Every result is ranked against 130,000+ real editorial candidates tested since 1998. TestGorilla provides scores but no external editorial benchmark.

Human Expert Review

Every open-response result — Writing, Editing, Proofreading and MS Word Part B — is reviewed by a human editor before it is released, within 12 hours. TestGorilla is automated-only — there is no human in the loop.

Try the Specialist Platform Free

No account required. No credit card. Run any editorial assessment in under 5 minutes and see results immediately.

About the figures on this page

Competitor pricing was read from each company's own public pricing page on . Prices change, and several of these companies do not publish them at all — where that is the case we say so rather than estimate. Feature comparisons describe what each product publicly documents. If you find something out of date here, tell us at [email protected] and we will correct it.

Editors from these organisations have used our services since 1998

Reuters BBC Oxford University Press Penguin Random House Springer Microsoft Suncor Energy United Nations Fisher Investments IBM The Home Depot KODAK CHEVRON