Updated July 27, 2026.
The verdict: Extend and Reducto both offer APIs for parsing, extraction, splitting, classification, and document editing. Extend leads on the published RealDoc-Bench and LongArray-Extract results and includes evaluation, automated schema optimization, and human-in-the-loop review on every tier. Reducto offers capable agentic modes, but teams must upgrade to Growth for Studio evaluations and build their own review-and-correction workflow.
Extend is the stronger fit for accuracy-critical production pipelines that need a complete quality layer around document processing. Reducto fits teams that want a parsing-first API with agentic enhancement modes and are prepared to own more of the evaluation and review infrastructure.
This article summarizes the current product differences. See the dedicated Extend vs. Reducto comparison page for the complete feature matrix and methodology.
Extend vs. Reducto at a glance
The comparison below uses Extend's documentation, Reducto's documentation, and both vendors' current pricing pages.
| Decision area | Extend | Reducto |
|---|---|---|
| Core product | Document processing platform for parsing, extraction, splitting, classification, editing, workflows, evaluation, and review | Agentic document platform for parsing, extraction, splitting, classification, editing, and pipelines |
| Best fit | Accuracy-critical pipelines and agents that need schema-shaped output and quality operations on every tier | Teams that want a parsing-first API with agentic accuracy modes and plan to own evaluation and review operations |
| Input types | 35+ file types, including PDFs, images, spreadsheets, presentations, and scanned files | 30+ file types, including PDFs, images, spreadsheets, presentations, and text documents |
| Parsing output | Layout-aware markdown plus blocks for text, tables, figures, and key-value pairs with spatial metadata | Structured parse output with layout, tables, forms, figures, and bounding boxes |
| Schema extraction | User-defined JSON Schema with nested objects, arrays, field instructions, citations, and confidence | Schema-based extraction plus the agentic Deep Extract mode |
| Evaluation and QA | Evaluation sets, accuracy reports, Composer schema optimization, Review Agent, and a review interface on every tier | Studio evaluations on Growth and above |
| Human review | Review Agent flags likely issues, and Studio provides an interface for inspecting and correcting output | No packaged review-and-correction workflow located in current documentation |
| Workflows | Versioned workflows combine parse, extract, classify, split, validation, and review | Pipelines chain parse, extract, and split |
| Deployment | Cloud for all tiers; self-hosted deployment, custom models, SSO/SAML, and advanced RBAC on Enterprise | Cloud; VPC and on-premises deployment, RBAC, and SSO/SAML on Enterprise |
| Starting price | 10,000 free credits, then $0.0125 per additional credit with no monthly platform fee | 15,000 free credits, then $0.015 per credit |
Parsing accuracy on RealDoc-Bench
RealDoc-Bench measures whether parsed output preserves enough structure for an answering model to return verified values. Extend published and open-sourced the benchmark, including the dataset, paper, methodology, and parsed outputs.
The corpus contains production documents and 1,356 field-level questions across financial services, real estate, logistics, and healthcare.
| Benchmark slice | Extend Parse 2.0 | Reducto Agentic | Difference (Extend lead) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall field-level QA accuracy | 95.7% | 91.1% | +4.6 points |
| Financial services | 92.5% | 85.7% | +6.8 points |
| Real estate | 96.9% | 92.0% | +4.9 points |
| Logistics | 97.7% | 94.4% | +3.3 points |
| Healthcare | 89.1% | 86.0% | +3.1 points |
| Layout adjusted F1 | 0.847 | 0.759 | +0.088 |
Reducto's standard mode scored 88.5% overall on the same benchmark. Extend Parse 2.0 leads Reducto Standard by 7.2 points and Reducto Agentic by 4.6 points on this corpus. This is a measured result for these documents and configurations, not a universal accuracy claim.
The gap is widest in financial services, where dense tables, repeated fields, and mixed layouts make document structure as important as text recognition.
Array extraction performance on LongArray-Extract
LongArray-Extract evaluates 45 long production documents with hundreds to thousands of repeated records. Failed or timed-out runs score zero, so a system cannot preserve a high field score by omitting difficult documents.
| System | Aggregate accuracy | Documents completed | Difference (Extend lead) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Extend MAX | 99.2% | 45 of 45 | Baseline |
| Reducto Deep Extract | 97.4% | 45 of 45 | +1.8 points |
| Reducto Standard | 80.9% | 45 of 45 | +18.3 points |
Reducto Deep Extract completed every document and finished second. It took roughly 2.8 times as long as Extend MAX in the published results. Its price also scales with both pages and fields: 4 credits per page plus 0.1 credits per extracted field, with a 30-credit minimum per document.
Extend MAX finished first at 99.2% aggregate accuracy. Both vendors also offer faster modes for less demanding or latency-sensitive workloads.
The quality layer is the largest product difference
Parsing and extraction are only the first stages of a production document pipeline. Teams must also test configuration changes, detect regressions, route uncertain output, correct errors, and prove quality over time.
Extend includes that operating layer on every tier:
- Evaluation sets and accuracy reports
- Composer, which optimizes extraction schemas and prompts against ground-truth data
- Review Agent, which flags likely extraction issues
- An in-platform interface for inspecting and correcting output
- Versioned processors and workflows
- Per-field confidence and citations back to the source region
Reducto Studio provides a workspace for testing documents. Studio evaluations are listed on Growth and above. Current Reducto documentation does not describe a packaged human-in-the-loop review workflow or an automated schema-optimization agent.
That difference is small during a proof of concept. It becomes operational work in production. A team using Reducto must create labeled datasets, scoring logic, regression checks, review routing, and a correction interface, or add other tools to supply them.
Pricing: compare the mode that reaches your accuracy target
Both vendors use credit-based billing, but the free grants, rates, mode multipliers, and included quality tools differ.
Extend pricing starts with 10,000 free credits and access to Parse, Extract, Classify, Split, Edit, Studio, evals, Composer, Review Agent, agentic OCR, and workflows. Pay As You Go costs $0.0125 per additional credit with no monthly platform fee. Scale costs $500 per month, includes 50,000 credits, and charges $0.01 per additional credit.
Reducto pricing starts with 15,000 free credits, then charges $0.015 per credit. Its Standard tier includes the core APIs and up to five Studio seats. Studio evaluations, zero data retention, a BAA, premium rate limits, priority support, and data residency endpoints require Growth.
| Pricing dimension | Extend | Reducto |
|---|---|---|
| Free access | 10,000 credits with full product access, including evals, Composer, Review Agent, and workflows. Zero-data-retention terms with all foundation-model providers are included with no platform fee. | 15,000 credits on Standard; Studio evaluations, ZDR, and BAA require Growth |
| Pay as you go | $0.0125 per additional credit with no monthly platform fee | $0.015 per credit after the free grant |
| Growth package | Scale is $500 per month with 50,000 credits and $0.01 additional credits | Growth adds volume discounts, ZDR, BAA, premium limits, data residency, and Studio evaluations; price not listed |
| Agentic-mode economics | Configurable accuracy and latency modes billed at standard per-page credit rates | Agentic Parse doubles per-page credits; Deep Extract adds per-field charges and a per-document minimum |
Reducto's free grant is larger. Extend's listed pay-as-you-go rate is lower and includes evaluation and review tools. The only useful cost comparison is the full configuration required to hit the same accuracy target on the same documents.
When to choose Reducto
Choose Reducto when:
- You want a parsing-first API with documented agentic enhancement modes and are comfortable building the surrounding pipeline.
- Your extraction needs fit standard schema extraction, and Deep Extract's per-field pricing works for your document shapes.
- The 15,000-credit free grant matters for an extended evaluation period.
- Your team plans to own evaluation datasets, scoring, and review tooling, or the Growth tier's Studio evaluations cover your QA needs.
When to choose Extend
Choose Extend when:
- Your output must match a target schema across changing document types.
- Complex tables, dense forms, handwriting, checkboxes, charts, and mixed packets are common.
- You need evaluation sets, accuracy reports, schema optimization, and human review without building them.
- You need parsing, extraction, classification, splitting, form filling, and versioned workflows in one platform.
- Long documents with hundreds or thousands of repeated records make missing rows unacceptable.
- Errors in underwriting, claims, compliance, payments, patient records, logistics, and other systems of record matter for production use cases.
- Self-hosting, custom models, SSO/SAML, or advanced RBAC are requirements.
What to test before choosing
Do not choose a document platform from a feature checklist alone. Test both systems on your most complex and mission-critical documents.
- Select 25 to 100 representative documents, including the worst scans and longest tables.
- Define the exact target schema and ground-truth values before testing either vendor.
- Include handwriting, checkboxes, signatures, merged cells, multi-page tables, and mixed document packets.
- Count missing records, duplicate records, field errors, timeouts, and failed runs.
- Use the mode each platform needs to reach the same accuracy target.
- Calculate the real cost at that mode, including field charges, retries, evaluations, and review.
- Change one schema or document template and measure the work required to ship the update safely.
- Inspect the source trace for wrong answers to identify parsing, layout, association, schema, or review failures.
The winning system is the one that returns the required business object at the required accuracy with the lowest total operating cost.
Extend vs. Reducto FAQ
What is the main difference between Extend and Reducto?
Both platforms parse, extract, split, classify, and edit documents. Extend includes evaluation sets, accuracy reports, Composer schema optimization, Review Agent, a review interface, and versioned workflows on every tier. Reducto offers agentic processing modes and Studio, with Studio evaluations available on Growth and above. Teams using Reducto build their own review-and-correction workflow.
Is Extend more accurate than Reducto?
Extend leads Reducto on the published RealDoc-Bench and LongArray-Extract results. Extend Parse 2.0 scored 95.7% field-level QA accuracy on RealDoc-Bench compared with 91.1% for Reducto Agentic. Extend MAX scored 99.2% on LongArray-Extract compared with 97.4% for Reducto Deep Extract. These results apply to the tested corpora and configurations, so test both systems on your own documents.
Is Reducto cheaper than Extend?
Reducto offers a larger free grant at 15,000 credits compared with Extend's 10,000. Extend has a lower listed pay-as-you-go rate at $0.0125 per additional credit compared with Reducto's $0.015. Reducto's agentic modes can consume more credits, so compare the exact configuration each platform needs to reach your accuracy target.
Does Reducto include human-in-the-loop review?
Reducto Studio provides a testing workspace, and Studio evaluations are available on Growth and above. Current Reducto documentation does not describe a packaged review-and-correction workflow. Extend includes Review Agent and an in-platform review interface on every tier.
Does Extend have an equivalent to Reducto Deep Extract?
Yes. Extend MAX is Extend's highest-accuracy extraction configuration. On LongArray-Extract, Extend MAX scored 99.2% aggregate accuracy compared with 97.4% for Reducto Deep Extract, while both systems completed all 45 documents.
