Skip to content
all 7 formulas · computed from first principles · no AI

Readability Scorer

Flesch, Flesch–Kincaid, Gunning Fog, SMOG, Coleman–Liau, ARI and Dale–Chall — every formula implemented exactly as published, on a real tokenizer with a syllable counter and exception dictionary. See the equation behind every number, live as you type.

Your text — scores update live

Paste text on the left and the gauge lights up instantly.

Reference

Flesch Reading Ease bands

ScoreBandComfortable forTypical use
90–100Very easy5th gradeComics, very simple instructions
80–89Easy6th gradeConsumer content, conversational copy
70–79Fairly easy7th gradeMost successful blog posts
60–69Standard8th–9th gradeThe sweet spot for general web content
50–59Fairly difficult10th–12th gradeLong-form professional articles
30–49DifficultCollegeTechnical documentation, legal summaries
0–29Very difficultCollege graduateAcademic papers, dense specifications
Field notes

Why seven formulas, and which one to trust

No single readability formula is “the right one” — they measure different proxies. Flesch and Flesch–Kincaid lean on syllables per word, so they punish long words; Coleman–Liau and ARI count characters instead, which makes them immune to syllable-counting quirks but blind to genuinely hard vocabulary; Gunning Fog counts “complex” words with exclusions for proper nouns and inflections; SMOG was built for health materials and insists on a 30-sentence sample; Dale–Chall is the only one that asks whether the specific words are familiar, not just short. When all seven roughly agree, trust the composite. When they diverge sharply, that divergence is itself the finding — usually long words in short sentences, or the reverse.

The web has a strong empirical answer to “what should I aim for”: Flesch Reading Ease of 60+ and a grade level of 8–9 for general audiences. That is not dumbing down — it's respecting that people read screens in a hurry, in bad light, in their second language. Technical audiences tolerate grade 10–12 comfortably, but nobody has ever complained that expert content was too easy to read. The fastest levers are mechanical: split any sentence over 25 words, replace three-syllable words where a shorter one carries the same meaning, and break paragraph walls.

Be skeptical of tools that hide the math. Syllable counting is where most readability checkers silently disagree — this one uses vowel-group counting with silent-e, -le and hiatus rules plus an exception dictionary, and the same text always yields the same counts. The formulas are printed next to their scores, so you can verify any number by hand. That determinism matters when readability targets are part of a style guide or contract: a score you can reproduce is a score you can enforce.

Readability is one leg of content quality. Check the topical side — density, placement, phrase repetition — in the Keyword & N-Gram Analyzer, run the whole page through the 85-check SEO audit (it embeds this exact readability engine), and preview how your polished title renders in the SERP preview.

Readability Scorer FAQs

Have more questions? Contact us

Trusted for Editorial QA

4.9
Based on 1,860 reviews

The only readability tool I've used that prints the formula next to the score. Our style guide mandates grade ≤ 9, and being able to reproduce the number by hand ended every argument with stakeholders. The longest-sentences list is my first stop on every edit.

C
Claire Dubois
UX writer
June 21, 2026

We gate doc PRs on Flesch ≥ 50 and this matches our CI numbers exactly — same tokenizer philosophy, deterministic syllables. The SMOG 'insufficient sample' honesty instead of a fake score tells you everything about how this tool was built.

A
Arjun Mehta
Documentation lead
May 30, 2026

Live scoring while I trim sentences is addictive — watching Fog drop from 14 to 10 as I split clauses. Passive cues labeled 'cue, not verdict' is refreshingly honest, and it still catches 90% of what I'd flag manually.

M
Megan Torres
Content editor
April 12, 2026

SMOG support with correct 30-sentence handling matters in health writing and almost no free tool does it right. Dale–Chall runs on a compact word list, clearly labeled, so I treat it as directional — everything else matches my reference calculator to the decimal.

O
Oliver Grant
Health content writer
March 17, 2026

Love using our calculator?

Connected instruments

The rest of SEO Forge

Learn More

Related Articles

Dive deeper with our expert guides and tutorials related to Readability Scorer

Loading articles...

7 formulas from first principles · composite grade · sentence diagnostics · transition & passive cues · live as you type · in-browser · Last reviewed: 2026-07