Best AI for proofreading

As of 2026-10-13, Google: Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite is the strongest model for this task in our daily benchmark, where over 350 AI models are evaluated and the best are presented.

Proofreading is where AI delivers the most value at the least risk: the text is already yours, the model just has to find the errors. But it genuinely has to know the language — a model with weak grasp will “correct” correct Norwegian into incorrect Norwegian.

We rank by language quality, which is the direct measure of whether a model can correct the language at all. Ranked by language score, from today’s benchmark.

Runner-up
IBM: Granite 4.0 Micro
ibm-granite
Score: 7.3/10
Language: 9.7/10
Speed: 326 t/s
$0.02
Third choice
Cohere: Command R+ (08-2024)
cohere
Score: 8.3/10
Language: 9.3/10
Speed: 276 t/s
$2.50

Today’s ranking

ModelProviderScoreLanguageSpeedInput price/1M
Google: Gemini 3.5 Flash Litegoogle8.7/109.7/10178 t/s$0.30
IBM: Granite 4.0 Microibm-granite7.3/109.7/10326 t/s$0.02
Cohere: Command R+ (08-2024)cohere8.3/109.3/10276 t/s$2.50
Cohere: Command R7B (12-2024)cohere6.9/109.3/10405 t/s$0.04
Anthropic: Claude Opus 5.5anthropic8.3/109.0/10266 t/s$4.00
Anthropic: Claude Sonnet 5.5anthropic8.0/109.0/10200 t/s$2.00
DeepSeek: DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731deepseek8.1/108.7/10452 t/s$0.02
Meta: Llama 4 Maverickmeta-llama7.5/108.7/10111 t/s$0.19

Ask for correction, not rewriting

The default behaviour of most models is to rewrite the whole text in their own style. Be explicit: “Correct spelling, punctuation and grammar only. Keep the wording and sentence structure.” Asking it to list the changes shows you what was actually done.

What AI misses

Models are good at commas, agreement and compound words. They are weaker on factual errors, internal contradictions and whether the text actually works for the reader. Proofreading is not the same as editing.

hvilkenAI is independent. We have no affiliate agreements, sponsored placements or commercial ties to the AI providers we test. Every recommendation rests on test results alone.

Frequently asked questions

Which AI corrects Scandinavian languages best?
The ranking above comes from today’s benchmark, where we evaluate over 350 models and present the strongest on the language.
Can AI replace a proofreader?
For everyday text, largely yes. For text that will be published or carry legal weight, no — use AI as the first pass and a human as the last.
Does AI catch compound-word errors?
The strongest models catch most cases, but not all. Compound words are one of the error types where Scandinavian languages differ sharply from English and where weak models fail most often.
Will the AI change the meaning of my text?
It can, if you do not tell it not to. Explicitly ask it to preserve content and wording, and review the changes.

Other tasks

Doing something else? See which model is best for it.

→ Other tasks

Read also

← Back to home

How to get more value from this recommendation

Use this recommendation as a practical decision aid, not as an advertising list. HvilkenAI is built to make AI selection easier when the market changes quickly and model names alone say little about real quality.

Start with the task you actually need to solve. A model that is good at short chat is not automatically best for long documents, code, customer-facing text, research or work involving sensitive information. Consider language quality, price, speed, stability and how much editing the answer requires before choosing a subscription or API.

We evaluate over 350 AI models and present the most useful signals in a format that works for everyday users, students, businesses and developers. The exact calculation is proprietary, but the assessment is based on standardised tasks, updated benchmark data and editorial review of whether the recommendations make sense in practical use.

For important decisions, run a small test of your own: use the same prompt, language and expected format in two or three relevant models. Look at precision, source handling, tone, speed and how easy the answer is to verify. That makes the benchmark a time-saving starting point, not a final answer you must follow blindly.

Use the links on the page as well. One page rarely gives the whole picture: the benchmark shows today’s numbers, the AI test translates your need into concrete recommendations, and the privacy/terms pages explain which data and limitations you should consider. Used together, these sources make the choice more robust than following a model name from social media.

If the result will be used at work, document why the tool was chosen: which task it solves, which alternatives were considered, which data should not be shared and how the answer will be quality-checked. That makes it easier to switch model later if price, quality or provider terms change.

When a page is included in the sitemap, it should also stand on its own as a useful explanation. That is why we emphasise practical choices, concrete control questions and clear limits for how data can be used.

The goal is that the reader can move on with a safer choice after a few minutes, without already knowing every model or provider.

Pay particular attention to whether the recommendation fits the language, price and risk in your own situation.

In short: choose what you can verify.

When free is enough

Choose free or low-cost first when the task is simple, risk is low and you can verify the answer yourself.

When paid is worth it

Paid models can be worth the cost when documents are long, precision matters or you save real working time.

When to wait

If the need is unclear, start with the test and benchmark before committing to a provider.