Quick Answer
ProWritingAid is better for creative writing. Grammarly is better for business writing. ProWritingAid uses analytical AI, not generative AI. Grammarly relies on generative AI for several features. If you write fiction, ProWritingAid users report better results.
Grammarly vs ProWritingAid Comparison
| Feature | Grammarly | ProWritingAid |
|---|---|---|
| Primary use | Business reports, formal writing | Creative writing, fiction |
| AI type | Pattern matching + generative AI | Analytical AI (non-generative) |
| Dialogue handling | Cannot understand idiomatic dialogue AT ALL | Better with natural speech |
| Suggestions | Often suggest changes that damage meaning | Logical suggestions with explanations |
| Learning value | Minimal | You learn writing rules |
| Customization | Limited modules | Many modules, toggle on/off |
| Critique accuracy | Too positive, even on bad writing | Vague sometimes but actionable |
| Price | Free or cheap ($15/month) | ~$120/year |
Check out this article: Best Free Writing Software Your Ultimate Guide to Choosing Right
ProWritingAid: When to Use It
Who benefits: Fiction writers, novelists, authors self-publishing or traditionally publishing.
ProWritingAid catches excess dialogue tags, overused words, passive voice, and provides chapter and manuscript feedback. One user stated: “I use PWA as a rough edit for things like repeated words and passive voice. (It hate, hate, hates passive voice!) It does sometimes suggest a better sentence phrasing. I pick and choose what to accept.”
Most of PWA’s features existed before generative AI became common. Users say the platform doesn’t store information or use data to update datasets.
One fiction writer rated it highly: “Overall, it’s a tool I’d be happy to give an 8/10 for.” Another described it as “the Budget Editor. It’s thorough enough to gloss up your work so that it looks like care was taken in writing it.”
Advanced features: ProWritingAid offers chapter critiques (up to 3 per day based on plan) and manuscript analysis. One user noted: “It also has manuscript analysis which looks at your whole work as a project. A Big Boy version of the chapter critique. While still janky and not quite right, it can tell you a lot about your work and how it’s laid out and flowing, and several modules within that help you shape your work further if needed.”
Weaknesses: Chapter critiques have limitations—they lack context about what came before or after. One user explained: “It has no context of what came before it, and what comes after it, so it considers each chapter a thing of its own which makes their feedback kinda limp in that sense. It’ll tell you that Character X needs to be fleshed out a bit more, but you do that two chapters later. It can’t see that to use it in context.”
Grammarly: When to Use It
Who benefits: Business writers, those writing reports, anyone on a budget wanting free options.
Grammarly catches basic errors quickly. One user noted it has “many modules available to narrow down a focus, and not all modules need to be used.” For spelling, grammar, and punctuation issues, it works well.
Weaknesses: One Top 1% Commenter stated: “I don’t like that Grammarly can’t understand idiomatic dialogue AT ALL. It demands things you would never say. I always say that Grammarly is 95% miracle and 5% dangerous. EVERY change suggested by either must be evaluated carefully or they will change the meaning of your story.”
Another user reported: “The little corrections are better than basic spell check and pointing out passive voice is nice. It won’t let me buy it, so I don’t know about the premium features.”
Users also noted that Grammarly’s critique features are “a bit too positive” and still come back with “mostly glowing review” even when submitted intentionally terrible writing.
ProWritingAid vs Claude AI: An Emerging Alternative
One user has moved away from ProWritingAid entirely: “I bought an annual sub and I’m not gonna renew. The critique features aren’t great. The passive voice and grammar check are okay if you’re not good with that stuff. But I started running my chapters through Claude to get a line by line grammar check and it’s made PWA obsolete. It has less customization than using something like Claude and it’s constantly pointing out things I’ve used for a stylistic choice.”
This user emphasized PWA’s strength for beginners: “It’s great if you’re not using any other tools and you’re new to writing – but be careful with its suggestions. Like all ai tools, it gets a lot of things wrong.”
Key Differences Explained
Technology: Analytical vs. Generative AI
ProWritingAid uses analytical AI primarily. According to one published author: “PWA has been using almost all of those tools since before Gen AI was a thing. The ‘sparks’ feature is the thing I can imagine would need generative AI, and that was there before Gen AI as we know it. I’ve been a PWA subscriber for far longer than Gen AI has been a thing, and everything but the AI manuscript reports (which are analytical, though they could use some Gen AI for all know) are the only thing I recall showing up after AI became a thing.”
Grammarly uses generative AI for features like Sparks, Rephrase, Critique Report, Manuscript Analysis, and Virtual Beta Reader. One user confirmed: “PWA 100% uses generative AI. ‘Sparks, Rephrase, Critique Report, Manuscript Analysis, and Virtual Beta Reader features, all of which can be turned off.’ It’s right on their website.”
However, a fiction writer clarified: “It has AI with suggestions and Sparks, yes. But these aren’t mandatory to use within the tool. It’s your choice to use them or not. No tool will ever replace a human editor, of course, but for the price point, authors on a budget will serve themselves well to use PWA or similar rather than simply trying to do it themselves and hope for the best.”
Writing Style Philosophy
One writer stated: “I write because I enjoy the process of writing. I have no interest in offloading that process to automation.”
Another emphasized careful editing: “I lean heavily on the style, grammar, and overused reports but consider the rest fluff. In no cases that I use PWA does it rewrite anything. If the solutions to errors are obvious, such as a missing comma, I accept them. Otherwise I solve the issues myself. As someone else pointed out, most of PWA’s functionality was in place long before AI.”
Real User Workflows
ProWritingAid Users
One user described their process: “I go through each and every suggestion one at a time and decide which changes I’ll make, if any. Sometimes the changes suggested alter the tone or take a readable sentence and make it incorrect and near unreadable/clunky.”
Another stated: “I use PWA as a rough edit for things like repeated words and passive voice. It does sometimes suggest a better sentence phrasing. I pick and choose what to accept.”
For AI-Resistant Writers
If you want to avoid AI entirely, one user offered this perspective: “I think all these grammar checking tools use AI in some way, so if you wanna avoid it – you’ll have to stop using Grammarly too, probably pick up a typewriter – and keep ‘The elements of style’ on your desk.”
An alternative suggestion: “ProWritingAid is fine for grammar stuff, but if you’re looking for something reliable and AI-free, might as well invest in a decent editor/proofreader or beta reader at the very least.”
Choose ProWritingAid If…
- You write fiction or creative content
- You want detailed feedback on writing problems
- You’re willing to interpret suggestions yourself
- You want chapter-level or manuscript-level analysis
- You prefer analytical AI over generative AI
- You’re a published author or serious indie publisher
Cost: ~$120/year. Users describe this as a solid investment for serious writers, with one noting: “For the money paid and what it can do for an author, I consider it money well spent.”
Choose Grammarly If…
- You write business documents or reports
- You want quick, simple corrections
- You’re on a tight budget (free version exists)
- You need basic error-catching only
- You’re new to writing and don’t need advanced features
Cost: Free to ~$15/month.
Choose Both If…
You’re an indie author or serious writer willing to invest. Use ProWritingAid for manuscript development and analysis. Use Grammarly as a final polishing pass for basic errors.
When Neither Tool Is Enough
For AI-resistant writers: Some suggest moving beyond automated tools entirely. One user recommended: “ProWritingAid is fine for grammar stuff, but if you’re looking for something reliable and AI-free, might as well invest in a decent editor/proofreader or beta reader at the very least.”
For writers using advanced AI: One user found Claude AI superior for grammar checking: “I started running my chapters through claude to get a line by line grammar check and it’s made PWA obsolete.”
Common User Mistakes
Mistake 1: Accepting all suggestions automatically. Users report this makes writing sound generic or damages meaning. One user said suggestions can “take a readable sentence and make it incorrect.”
Mistake 2: Relying on tools for stylistic choices. Users note that tools constantly flag intentional stylistic decisions as errors.
Mistake 3: Over-trusting critique features. ProWritingAid critiques lack narrative context. Grammarly critiques are overly positive.
Mistake 4: Using tools while drafting. Write first, edit later. One user noted writing “larger chunks (2000+ words) and running a grammar checker tool later after some rework” produces better results than constant refinement.
Final Verdict from Real Users
For creative writers: ProWritingAid offers depth that Grammarly doesn’t, despite the higher cost. One user rated it 8/10 overall.
For professional authors: One published author stated: “I don’t know any pro writers who use it [Grammarly], put it that way.”
For budget-conscious beginners: ProWritingAid works if you’re new to writing, but be selective with suggestions. One user warned: “It’s great if you’re not using any other tools and you’re new to writing – but be careful with its suggestions. Like all ai tools, it gets a lot of things wrong.”
For those avoiding AI: Consider investing in human editors, proofreaders, or beta readers instead of relying on automated tools entirely.
