eLife
Depends
Confidence: Medium
eLife is a non-profit scientific journal, not software . 'buying' means submitting research and paying a publication fee.
Comparison
eLife vs PLOS
eLife and PLOS both land on Depends.
PLOS
Depends
Confidence: Medium
A solid choice if you need peer-reviewed open access on a reasonable timeline, especially if your institution has a flat-fee deal.
| Compare | eLife | PLOS |
|---|---|---|
| Verdict | Depends | Depends |
| Best for | Life-science researchers | Sound-science papers without novelty claims |
| Who it's not for | Software buyers . this is a journal, not a tool | Prestige and impact-factor chasers |
| Privacy | No known public vulnerabilities found in the sources reviewed.⁶ | No vendor-style security posture to assess; a compensation site references a breach lawsuit and the official security page returns a 404. |
| Support quality | No author-support evidence found | No usable support evidence found |
| Public sentiment | Academics praise eLife's open, transparent model but debate whether its reviewed preprints carry traditional publication prestige.⁷ | Authors describe PLOS as relatively quick and a genuine open-access endeavor, while community threads debate its prestige and paper quality. |
| Biggest gotcha | Reviewed Preprint may not satisfy institutions expecting a final accepted paper⁷ | APC is due on acceptance . check whether your library's flat fee covers it before submitting |
Pick eLife when
- Life-science researchers
- Open peer review advocates
- Funder-mandated open access
- Readers wanting free research
When eLife is not a fit
- Software buyers . this is a journal, not a tool
- Authors needing traditional accept/reject prestige for tenure or hiring
- Anyone chasing a fast, final publication stamp
- Non-scientists or general content publishing
Pick PLOS when
- Sound-science papers without novelty claims
- Authors under open-access mandates
- Institutions with PLOS flat-fee agreements
- Researchers who cannot pay (waiver route)
When PLOS is not a fit
- Prestige and impact-factor chasers
- Authors without ~$2,477 or an institutional deal
- Anyone expecting curated selectivity . acceptance is soundness-only
- Readers wanting tightly vetted, low-volume content
Sources
- About eLifeelifesciences.orgofficial
- Peer review and publishing at eLifeelifesciences.orgofficial
- eLife ends accept/reject decisions following peer reviewelifesciences.orgnews
- Submit your research (publication fee)elifesciences.orgofficial
- eLife receives Wellcome boost to build open publishing ecosystemelifesciences.orgnews
- Product security pageelifesciences.orgsecurity
review
- eLife Under Review: Reviewed Preprint Status (2026)manusights.comreview
- eLife Sciences consultancy (unrelated company, elifesciences.co)elifesciences.coofficial
- PLOS fees and fundingplos.orgofficial
- PLOS ONE APC (2026): $2477 Fee and Waivers Guidemanusights.comreview
- PLOS ONE Review Time: 35-45 Daysmanusights.comreview
- Editorial and Peer Review Process | PLOS Onejournals.plos.orgofficial
- PLOS - Wikipediaen.wikipedia.orgofficial
- PLOS ONE vs. Scientific Reportsreddit.comreview