BulletPROOF
Support About Us Contact
BulletPROOF

See How BulletPROOF Compares to Other Tools

We looked across industry leaders—site trust-rating extensions, human fact-checking outlets, narrative intelligence platforms, and claim databases—to show where BulletPROOF stands out: full‑article analysis with transparent, per‑claim scoring.

Jump to Summary Read the Deep Dive
What we compared
  • • Granularity (site-level vs. claim vs. full-article)
  • • Transparency & methodology
  • • Automation vs. human review
  • • Coverage & language support
  • • Pricing & accessibility
  • • Use cases: reader, newsroom, developer

Quick Comparison

Apples-to-apples view of popular verification tools versus BulletPROOF.

Tool Core focus Granularity How it verifies Coverage Pricing / Access
BulletPROOF You are here AI‑assisted full‑article verification & Proof Score Full article + per‑claim NLP claim extraction, cross‑source corroboration, transparent scoring News articles; API for developers Free & paid tiers (site pricing page)
NewsGuard Publisher/site trust ratings Site/domain level Human journalist criteria (9 criteria) via browser/app 35k+ sites; browser integrations $4.95/mo personal; free on Edge
Google Fact Check Explorer Search existing fact checks (ClaimReview) Claim-level (if previously checked) Aggregates third‑party fact checks; supports ClaimReview markup Global index of fact‑checks Free
Snopes / PolitiFact Editorial fact‑checking Claim/story level (human articles) Journalist research + documented sources (Truth‑O‑Meter at PolitiFact) Primarily U.S./English Free sites; memberships/donations
Full Fact / Full Fact AI Nonprofit fact‑checking + AI tools for checkers Claim-level; monitoring AI to surface/check claims; humans publish fact checks UK-based; global partners Org licensing / partnerships
Logically / Logically Facts AI + human fact-checking; influence monitoring Claim monitoring; intel tooling AI pre‑screen + human review; enterprise offerings Multilingual Enterprise; recent org changes
Blackbird.AI Narrative/risk intelligence for orgs Narrative/network level AI detects emerging narratives, actors, risks Enterprise monitoring Enterprise
AdVerif.ai (now Zefr) Ad verification / brand safety vs misinformation URL/content-level for ads ML models (FakeRank), integrated in Zefr Ad networks, platforms Enterprise

Notes: Public pricing and availability may change. See each vendor’s site for the latest.

Deep Dive: Strengths, Gaps & Ideal Use Cases

BulletPROOF

What’s unique: full‑article analysis that extracts claims, cross‑checks sources in parallel, and computes a transparent Proof Score with a per‑claim breakdown. Great for readers, reporters, and developers needing article‑specific verification rather than site‑level reputations or one‑off claim lookups.

  • Per‑claim evidence graph: sources, contradictions, and consensus context.
  • Bias and rhetoric signals (language framing, emotional valence) flagged inline.
  • API & SDK for integrating trust scores into CMS, extensions, or apps.
  • Works on new articles—even when no prior fact‑check exists.

NewsGuard

Strength: clear, site-level “Nutrition Labels” and trust icons maintained by journalists across 35k+ sources; helpful early filter for overall publisher credibility.

  • Great at: high-level source hygiene while browsing.
  • Limit: scores a site, not the specific article; strong sources sometimes publish weak articles and vice‑versa.
  • Access: browser extensions & mobile apps; personal plan available.

Google Fact Check Explorer

Strength: fast way to search existing fact‑checks across the web via ClaimReview markup.

  • Great at: finding whether a claim has already been checked and by whom.
  • Limit: doesn’t check claims itself; if no one has published a fact‑check, there’s nothing to retrieve.
  • Integrates with publishers via ClaimReview (Explorer support continues even as some Search surfaces change).

Snopes & PolitiFact

Strength: meticulous editorial articles with transparent sourcing; PolitiFact’s Truth‑O‑Meter offers an easy verdict scale.

  • Great at: nuanced, high‑quality human judgment on notable claims.
  • Limit: human throughput; may not cover fresh or niche articles quickly; verdict scales compress nuance.
  • Best used alongside automated tools for speed, then cite their reports for depth.

Full Fact & Full Fact AI

Strength: respected nonprofit; AI helps identify and triage claims for fact‑checkers, improving coverage and response time.

  • Great at: newsroom/NGO workflows—monitoring debates, surfacing check‑worthy claims.
  • Limit: tooling primarily supports checkers rather than offering consumer article scores.

Logically / Logically Facts

Strength: combined AI + human fact‑checking at scale; influence mapping. Note: organization has undergone significant changes in 2025.

  • Great at: enterprise/government monitoring and multilingual checks.
  • Limit: recent transitions and availability may affect offerings; consumer article scoring not the core focus.

Blackbird.AI

Strength: narrative intelligence—detects emerging narratives, actors, and coordinated manipulation; risk scoring for organizations.

  • Great at: brand/reputation defense and crisis response.
  • Limit: not a per‑article fact checker; designed for enterprise analysis rather than consumer media verification.

AdVerif.ai (now part of Zefr)

Strength: brand safety in advertising—flagging mis/disinformation inventory and risky content for advertisers.

  • Great at: ad‑level screening and platform integrations.
  • Limit: not aimed at checking news articles end‑to‑end for readers.

Where BulletPROOF Fits

When no prior fact‑check exists—or when a reputable site publishes a questionable article—BulletPROOF generates claim‑by‑claim corroboration and a transparent Proof Score, so you can trust (or challenge) an article on its own merits.

Readers & Students

Paste a link, get a per‑claim report and clean citations. Learn to spot rhetoric and bias.

Journalists & Newsrooms

Pre‑publication checks, claim extraction, and audit trails embedded in your CMS.

Developers & Platforms

API/SDK to compute and display Proof Scores inside your products.

Methodology (High Level)

  1. Ingest article content; segment by claims, evidence, and context.
  2. Corroborate claims against diverse sources (news wires, institutional reports, scholarly summaries) using retrieval + stance analysis.
  3. Score per‑claim strength, contradictions, and uncertainty; aggregate into an article‑level Proof Score.
  4. Explain every step with links and rationales; highlight rhetoric/bias signals.

Important: Scores summarize evidence as of retrieval time; they are not an appeal to authority and should be revisited as facts evolve.

Compare Less. Verify More.

Use BulletPROOF to evaluate full articles—even when no one else has checked them yet.

Get Started