shouldiuse.io

Categories

VERDICT

Should I use Edanz?

Scientific editing, translation, and journal selection services for researchers. - edanz.com

Depends. Buy if you are a non-native-English researcher with a manuscript near submission who wants human editors and journal-matching help. Skip it if you expected software pricing, a self-serve tool, or any acceptance guarantee.

Confidence

Medium. Based on 13 public sources; no public pricing tiers or customer rating numbers found, so stats omitted and scores marked null where unevidenced.

Ratings

  • Value for moneyNo published pricing or value verdicts in evidence
  • Ease of useNo usability reviews found in sources
  • Feature depth
  • Support qualityOnly employee reviews found, not customer support evidence
  • Security posture

Pricing

Not disclosed

ModelNot disclosed
Monthly feesNot disclosed
HardwareNot disclosed

Best for

  • Non-native English researchers publishing internationally
  • PhD and early-career authors picking target journals
  • Authors needing language editing certificates for submissions

Not for

  • Buyers wanting SaaS pricing — this is quote-based human service
  • Native-English authors needing only a quick proofread — cheaper options exist (Guess)
  • Anyone expecting guaranteed journal acceptance — no editor can promise that

Gotchas - check before you buy

medium

Custom per-manuscript quotes; costs can balloon on long papers

medium

Editing certificates cover language only; no acceptance guarantee

medium

Journal selector output lacks validation; verify matches yourself

low

Name collides with unrelated EDANZ groups; verify you're on

Pros and cons

Pros

  • Two decades serving international researchers; editors credited in published papers
  • Free journal selector appears in university library guides
  • Broad service menu: editing, translation, journal selection, manuscript development
  • Third-party domain trust checks come back clean

Cons

  • Employee review alleges burnout: 'They are working me to death'
  • Insider on company outlook: 'It is a sink'
  • Journal advisor flagged for 'no rating or validation'
  • Guess: no public pricing; every job is a custom quote

Sources & method

Analyzed 10/06/2026 - 13 sources - No known vulnerabilities found in the sources reviewed.

official x5review x5security x3

Key stats

  • Feature depth: 4/5

    Rating

  • Not disclosed

    Starting price

  • 13

    Sources

  • Analyzed

  • Value for money. No published pricing or value verdicts in evidence
  • Ease of use. No usability reviews found in sources
  • Feature depth: 4/5. Editing, translation, journal selection, manuscript development
  • Support quality. Only employee reviews found, not customer support evidence
  • Security posture: 4/5. Clean ScamAdviser/IPQS reputation; public security page

Pricing

Not disclosed

Security

No known vulnerabilities found in the sources reviewed.

Full analysis

Based on 13 public sources; no public pricing tiers or customer rating numbers found, so stats omitted and scores marked null where unevidenced.

Human editing + journal selection for researchers. Legit but quote-based pricing; wrong buy if you wanted software or guaranteed acceptance.

Methodology

Based on 13 public sources; no public pricing tiers or customer rating numbers found, so stats omitted and scores marked null where unevidenced.

Sources

  1. review
  2. review
  3. review
  4. review
  5. review
  6. official
  7. official
  8. official
  9. official
  10. security
  11. security
  12. security
  13. official

Rate this review

Anonymous. You can change your vote.

Loading votes…

Comments

One queue. No nested comments. Give a display name first. Limit: 200 words per comment and 7 comments per day. You can edit or delete yours.

Save a name to write a comment.

0 / 200 words

No comments yet.