Free Readability Checker

Score any text or web page on seven published readability formulas at once, with syllables counted against a real pronouncing dictionary rather than guessed, and see exactly which sentences and words are making it hard.

Your writing

Text or a live page

The formulas are easy. The counting is not.

Every readability formula in use today is arithmetic over three numbers: how many sentences you wrote, how many words, and how many syllables. Flesch Reading Ease, for instance, is nothing more than 206.835 − 1.015 × (words per sentence) − 84.6 × (syllables per word). Any two tools given the same three counts will agree exactly.

They do not agree, and the reason is that they disagree about the counts. Specifically, they disagree about syllables. There is no rule in English that reliably tells you how many syllables a written word has: “business” looks like three and is two, “every” looks like two and is three, “chocolate” can be either. The usual approach is to count groups of vowels and patch the result with a handful of rules, which gets roughly 85 to 90% of words right. Reading ease multiplies syllables per word by 84.6, so a counting error of a tenth of a syllable moves the score by eight points and the grade by more than one.

This checker counts syllables by rule and then by exception, with the exception table built from the Carnegie Mellon Pronouncing Dictionary, which records how 126,000 English words are actually said. Measured back against that dictionary and weighted by how often each word is really written, it gets 99.7% of words right, and the total syllable count of a page lands within 0.13% of the dictionary’s own. That is the whole reason to use this one.

What the score means

The big number is Flesch Reading Ease, on a scale where high is easy. Rudolf Flesch published the bands in 1948 and they have not needed changing:

  • 90 to 100 — very easy, readable by an average 11 year old.
  • 80 to 90 — easy. Most fiction sits here.
  • 70 to 80 — fairly easy.
  • 60 to 70 — plain English, readable by a 13 to 15 year old. This is the target for most writing on the web.
  • 50 to 60 — fairly hard. Quality journalism and good business writing.
  • 30 to 50 — hard. University level.
  • Below 30 — very hard. Academic papers, contracts, and the kind of policy document nobody finishes.

Scores can go above 100 and below zero. A page of four-word sentences made of one-syllable words will score in the 110s; a dense legal clause can score below −50. Both are real answers, not errors.

Seven formulas and one honest answer

Seven published formulas are reported, because each was built for a different kind of writing and each keys on something slightly different.

  • Flesch Reading Ease — the best known, and the one Microsoft Word reports. Sentence length and syllables per word.
  • Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level — the same measurements rearranged into a US school grade. Commissioned by the US Navy for technical manuals.
  • Gunning Fog Index — sentence length plus the share of words with three or more syllables. Written for business writing, and the strictest on jargon.
  • SMOG Index — counts only the long words. The standard choice for health and safety material, because it was validated for complete comprehension rather than partial.
  • Coleman-Liau Index — uses letters per word instead of syllables, so it never depends on anyone guessing a pronunciation.
  • Automated Readability Index — characters and words, designed in 1967 to be computed by a machine that counted keystrokes.
  • New Dale-Chall — the only one that looks at which words you used. A word is hard if it is not among the 3,000 that four out of five fourth-graders know. It is the best validated of the set, because familiarity predicts comprehension better than length does.

Six of those produce a grade level, and the headline figure is their median rather than their mean, so a single formula misbehaving on a short text cannot drag the answer with it. When they agree closely you can trust the number. When they spread out by more than two grades, something unusual is happening — most often short sentences built from long words — and you should read the text yourself.

Three things this does that other checkers do not

It reads acronyms the way you do. “SEO” is three syllables when anyone says it aloud, and “HTML” is four. Tools that treat them as one-syllable words quietly flatter every technical page. Here they are counted letter by letter, as long as the surrounding text is not also in capitals.

It applies Gunning’s own exclusions. Robert Gunning was explicit that proper nouns do not count as hard words, and neither do verbs that only reach three syllables by gaining an ending — “recorded” is not a difficult word. Almost every implementation skips both rules and reports a Fog score that is too high, especially on anything full of names. This one applies them, and spots proper nouns by looking at how a word is capitalised across the whole text rather than guessing word by word.

It shows its working. Every formula is printed with your own numbers substituted into it. You can check any score on a calculator in ten seconds, which is the only real answer to “why should I believe this”.

What to do with a bad score

There are exactly two levers, because there are only two inputs. Shorten sentences, or use shorter and more familiar words. Everything else is decoration.

  1. Start with the longest sentences. The hardest sentences are listed worst first. Most of them are two sentences that have been joined with “and” or a comma, and splitting them costs nothing.
  2. Then the words you lean on. The hard words list is ordered by how much each one is costing you, which is its length multiplied by how often you used it. A four-syllable word you used once is not the problem; the one you used nine times is. Where a genuine shorter synonym exists it is shown; where it does not, there is a dash, because swapping a precise word for a vague one makes writing worse, not better.
  3. Check the marked-up text. Difficulty is rarely spread evenly. Usually two or three paragraphs are carrying it, and the shading shows you where without reading the whole thing again.

What not to do is write to hit a number. Chopping every sentence to nine words produces prose that scores beautifully and reads like a ransom note. The score is a smoke alarm, not a recipe.

Does readability affect SEO?

Not directly. Google does not grade your prose and rank you on it, and has said so plainly more than once. What readability affects is everything that happens after someone lands: whether they read past the first screen, whether they find the answer they came for, whether they come back, and whether anybody thinks the page is worth linking to. Those are not ranking factors either, but they feed the ones that are.

The practical case is simpler than the SEO case. People read on phones, in a hurry, with something else competing for their attention. Writing that survives those conditions wins, and writing that needs a quiet room does not.

How much text does it need?

Thirty words before it will report anything, and a few hundred before the number is worth much. These formulas were developed on passages of a hundred words and up, and SMOG was built around samples of thirty sentences; below that it is extrapolating. The tool says so when your text is short. Run it on the whole article rather than the introduction.

Which tool do I want?

  • This one answers “how hard is this to read, and for whom”.
  • The Sentence Length Checker goes much deeper on one of the two inputs: the rhythm of your sentences, runs of long ones, and every sentence listed in order.
  • The Word Counter is for while you are drafting, with counts updating as you type.
  • The Paragraph Length Checker finds the walls of text, which no readability formula measures at all — a page can score 70 and still be unreadable because it has no paragraph breaks.
  • The Reading Time Calculator answers how long it takes rather than how hard it is, and adjusts its estimate using the same two measurements this page is built on.
  • When the writing is finished, the Blog Title Analyzer, the Meta Description Checker and the SERP Snippet Preview Tool handle how it presents itself in the results.

Is anything stored?

No. Pasted text is measured entirely in your browser and never leaves the page — the pronouncing dictionary and the familiar word list are part of the page itself, which is why the score appears as you type. The one exception is checking a page by address: a browser is not permitted to fetch another site’s pages directly, so the address is sent to our server, which reads the page and returns the text. Nothing is written to a database or a log either way, and the report exists only in the open tab.

Why this one is accurate

Every readability formula is simple arithmetic over three counts: sentences, words and syllables. The arithmetic is easy and everybody gets it right. The counting is hard, and that is where tools quietly disagree with each other by a whole grade.

Syllables counted against a dictionary

Rules plus an exception table for the words where English spelling and English speech part company. Measured against the CMU Pronouncing Dictionary it is right for 99.7% of words as they are actually written, and a page total lands within 0.13% of the dictionary. The usual vowel-counting trick is out by 10 to 15%.

Seven formulas, not one

Flesch Reading Ease, Flesch-Kincaid, Gunning Fog, SMOG, Coleman-Liau, the Automated Readability Index and New Dale-Chall, with a single consensus grade taken as the median so one outlier cannot drag the answer.

It shows its working

Every formula is printed with your own numbers substituted into it, so you can check the result on a calculator instead of taking a number on trust. No other free checker does this.

Acronyms are read out

SEO is three syllables and HTML is four, because that is how a reader says them. Counting them as one word of one syllable flatters every technical page, which is exactly what other tools do.

Gunning Fog done properly

Robert Gunning excluded proper nouns and verbs that only reach three syllables through an ending. Almost every implementation ignores both rules and reports a Fog score that is too high. This one applies them.

An answer you can act on

The hardest sentences listed worst first, the long words you leaned on with a shorter word beside them where one exists, your adverbs and your passive sentences, and the whole text shaded so you can see where the trouble is.

Questions about readability

What is a good readability score?

For most writing on the web, a Flesch Reading Ease of 60 or above and a reading level around grade 8 is the target. That is not because readers are unintelligent. It is because reading on a screen is done quickly, often on a phone, often while half distracted, and easy prose survives that and hard prose does not. Plain-language guidance for public information usually asks for grade 6. Technical documentation written for people who already know the field can sit at grade 12 to 14 without anyone complaining. Pick the audience at the top of the tool and it will tell you whether you are there.

Why does your score differ from another tool's?

Almost always because of syllables. Most checkers count vowel groups and patch the result with a few rules, which is wrong for 10 to 15% of words, and reading ease multiplies syllables per word by 84.6, so a small counting error becomes a large score difference. This tool counts syllables against the CMU Pronouncing Dictionary and gets 99.7% of written words right.

Two smaller reasons. Gunning Fog here leaves out proper nouns and verbs that only reach three syllables through an ending, as Robert Gunning specified and most tools do not, so our Fog score is usually a little lower. Dale-Chall here treats a regular inflection of a familiar word as familiar, so "accepted" counts as easy because "accept" is on the list; tools that skip that overstate how hard your writing is.

Which formula should I actually use?

Flesch Reading Ease if you want one number and you write for a general audience; it is the most widely understood and the one Microsoft Word reports. Flesch-Kincaid if you need to state a grade level to somebody. SMOG for health, safety or legal material, because it was built and validated for writing where being misunderstood has consequences. Dale-Chall when vocabulary is the question rather than sentence length, since it is the only one here that looks at which words you chose. Gunning Fog for business writing that has drifted into jargon.

In practice the consensus grade at the top is the honest answer. If the seven agree closely, trust it. If they spread out by more than two grades, something unusual is going on, usually short sentences made of long words, and you should read the text yourself rather than the number.

Is readability a Google ranking factor?

No. Google has said repeatedly that it does not score your prose and rank you on it, and nobody has produced evidence to the contrary. What readability affects is everything downstream of landing on the page: whether somebody reads past the first screen, whether they find the answer, whether they come back, and whether anyone links to it. A page nobody finishes does not earn links or repeat visits, and those do matter.

So treat this as an editing tool that happens to help your search performance, not as a box to tick. Writing to hit a number produces strange, choppy prose that scores well and reads badly, which is worse than where you started.

How much text does it need?

At least thirty words before it will report anything, and realistically a few hundred before the number means much. Every one of these formulas was developed on passages of a hundred words or more, and SMOG was designed around samples of thirty sentences. A single paragraph will give you a score, and the tool will say so, but one unusual sentence can move it several grades. Run it on the whole article.

What counts as a "hard word"?

Two different things, and the tool reports both. Words of three or more syllables are what Gunning Fog and SMOG count, which is a measure of length. Words outside the Dale-Chall list of around 3,000 words that four out of five fourth-graders know is a measure of familiarity, and it is the better of the two: "yesterday" is four syllables and perfectly easy, while "cede" is one syllable and most people would stumble.

Long is not the same as wrong. A precise long word beats a vague short one every time. The hard words list only suggests a replacement where a genuine shorter synonym exists, and leaves a dash where it does not.

How is this different from your other writing tools?

This is the one that answers "how hard is this to read, and for whom". The Sentence Length Checker goes deeper on one of the two inputs, showing the rhythm of your sentences and every long one in order. The Word Counter is for while you are drafting, with live counts as you type. The Paragraph Length Checker finds the walls of text, which no formula here measures at all. Use this first to see whether there is a problem, then the others to find it.

Is my text sent anywhere?

Pasted text is measured entirely in your browser and never leaves the page; the dictionary and the word list are part of the page itself. The one exception is checking a page by address, because a browser cannot fetch somebody else's site directly: the address is sent to our server, which reads the page and returns the text. Nothing is stored either way, and the report is gone when you close the tab.

More free SEO tools