The Grinder vs. Duotrope

Analog, Grinder:
Accuracy: There are 241 completed reports in the past 12 months.
Averages and Boundaries: 33 min | 134.44 mean avg | 133 median | 327 max days
Responded: 97.93%
Accepted: 2.90%
Rejected: 95.02% (14.41% of rejections are personal)
Rewrites: -
Dead Letters: 2.07%
Lost/Returned: -
Never Responded: -
Withdrawn: 2.07%
Pending: 56 pending responses (0 min | 68 mean avg | 51 median | 363 max days waiting)

Analog, Duotrope:
Accuracy: We have received 277 reports within the past 12 months, not including pending responses (see below).
Days Reported: 0 min | 139.3 mean avg | 137.0 median | 300 max days (37.6 std dev)
Responses: 96.03 %
Acceptances: 2.89 % (149.8 avg. days per acceptance) !
Rejections: 93.14 % (139.2 avg. days per rejection) | 16.28 % personal, 68.99 % form, 14.73 % unspecified
Rewrite Requests: -
Non-Responses: 3.97 %
Lost/Returned: 0.72 % (173.5 avg. days before reporting submissions as lost or returned)
Never Responded: 1.44 % (177.5 avg. days before reporting submissions as never responded)
Author Withdrawals: 1.81 % (81.2 avg. days per withdrawal by author)
Pending: 68 responses are pending (2 min | 107.7 mean avg | 55.0 median | 1244 max days waiting | 187.5 std dev) !

Asimov's, Grinder:
Accuracy: There are 618 completed reports in the past 12 months.
Averages and Boundaries: 0 min | 45.33 mean avg | 42 median | 200 max days
Responded: 99.84%
Accepted: 1.62%
Rejected: 98.22% (12.19% of rejections are personal)
Rewrites: -
Dead Letters: 0.16%
Lost/Returned: -
Never Responded: 0.16%
Withdrawn: -
Pending: 62 pending responses (0 min | 30 mean avg | 22 median | 311 max days waiting)

Asimov's, Duotrope:
Accuracy: We have received 625 reports within the past 12 months, not including pending responses (see below).
Days Reported: 0 min | 42.4 mean avg | 40.0 median | 134 max days (28.0 std dev)
Responses: 99.04 %
Acceptances: 0.96 % (75.0 avg. days per acceptance) !
Rejections: 98.08 % (41.9 avg. days per rejection) | 13.38 % personal, 76.84 % form, 9.79 % unspecified
Rewrite Requests: -
Non-Responses: 0.96 %
Lost/Returned: 0.16 % (83.0 avg. days before reporting submissions as lost or returned)
Never Responded: 0.32 % (116.0 avg. days before reporting submissions as never responded)
Author Withdrawals: 0.48 % (16.7 avg. days per withdrawal by author)
Pending: 68 responses are pending (2 min | 62.0 mean avg | 24.0 median | 783 max days waiting | 118.3 std dev) !

Andromeda Spaceways Inflight Magazine, Grinder
Accuracy: There are 197 completed reports in the past 12 months.
Averages and Boundaries: 2 min | 39.24 mean avg | 15 median | 267 max days
Responded: 97.46%
Accepted: 1.01%
Rejected: 96.44% (56.84% of rejections are personal)
Rewrites: -
Dead Letters: 2.53%
Lost/Returned: -
Never Responded: 1.01%
Withdrawn: 1.52%
Pending: 26 pending responses (1 min | 27 mean avg | 22 median | 251 max days waiting)

Andromeda Spaceways Inflight Magazine, Duotrope
Accuracy: We have received 304 reports within the past 12 months, not including pending responses (see below).
Days Reported: 1 min | 32.6 mean avg | 13.0 median | 155 max days (41.5 std dev)
Responses: 98.36 %
Acceptances: 0.00 % !
Rejections: 98.36 % (32.9 avg. days per rejection) | 50.84 % personal, 39.46 % form, 9.70 % unspecified
Rewrite Requests: -
Non-Responses: 1.65 %
Lost/Returned: -
Never Responded: 0.33 % (84.0 avg. days before reporting submissions as never responded)
Author Withdrawals: 1.32 % (1.5 avg. days per withdrawal by author)
Pending: 44 responses are pending (4 min | 60.3 mean avg | 30.5 median | 525 max days waiting | 89.4 std dev) !

Grinder Site Statistics
Markets: 3521 (1379 open)
Markets Recently Updated: 16
Markets Recently Added: 7
Users: 5324
Submissions: 63795

Duotrope Site Statistics
Markets: 4947
Activity in the Past 7 Days:
4255 submissions reported
1253 listings checked
491 listings updated
28 new listings added
Users & Subscribers
Registered user accounts increased by 23% in 2013.
Submissions Data
Over 225,000 submissions were reported in 2013.
We retained 85% of the number of submission reports in 2012.
Unreliable data decreased by over 55% in 2013.
New Listings and Updates
In 2013, we added around 1,800 new listings.
Also in 2013, we were able to make some much-needed additions to our staff. With their help, we made 38% more market listing updates in 2013 than we did in 2012, averaging around 184 updates per weekday.

Thanks, Martin.

A quick scan suggests the stats are fairly similar.

Steve

I pay for Duotrope a couple times a year. My impression is Grinder is a sci-fi site, but Duotrope is more all-purpose, maybe more literary.

In particular, as someone who straddles sci-fi and literary, I'd say Grinder's literary statistics are almost non-existent compared to Duotrope's. The sci-fi stats are roughly comparable, but Grinder tends to have higher acceptance rates in sci-fi. Seems to defeat the idea that Duotrope is for the more serious (sci-fi) writers. My guess is that on Duotrope you have a lot of people who actually write in some other genre submitting to sci-fi magazines.

Hi everyone,
This is David Steffen, co-founder and administrator of the Grinder. Don't let my presence put a damper on the conversation by any means. But wanted to chime in a few things.

1. The Grinder is more SF heavy than Duotrope. But this isn't because the Grinder focuses more on SF, it's because the user-base that the Grinder has attracted is more SF-heavy than literary-heavy. And that's because the two of us who launched it are SF writers and so our personal outreach hits much more SF than others. I'll make a listing for anything that meets the requirements for a market listing and genre is not a factor.

2. Duotrope does have more users, the numbers are in the same ballpark on SF markets but as you note not as much for literary markets.

3. Our feature set is still expanding, and we already have some shiny features that Duotrope doesn't--the graphs on the market listings are one of my favorites, as well as the Recent MArket Activity list on the front page which shows registered users the recent activity for the markets where they have pending listings all in one spot.

4. Duotrope's claim that their statistics are "better" because of the quality of their users they attract... I have always found that statement questionable. Why does a paying user provide more quality data than a user who doesn't? Spurious at best. And, as a frugal person on a budget, I don't see why paying more implies that this is a "better" user in some way--there's a missing bit in the logic to explain why "paying more money" implies "better quality of writer".

Feel free to ask me questions, make suggestions, otherwise carry on.

I pay for Duotrope a couple times a year. My impression is Grinder is a sci-fi site, but Duotrope is more all-purpose, maybe more literary.

In particular, as someone who straddles sci-fi and literary, I'd say Grinder's literary statistics are almost non-existent compared to Duotrope's. The sci-fi stats are roughly comparable, but Grinder tends to have higher acceptance rates in sci-fi. Seems to defeat the idea that Duotrope is for the more serious (sci-fi) writers. My guess is that on Duotrope you have a lot of people who actually write in some other genre submitting to sci-fi magazines.

Also, Duotrope fully supports poetry and nonfiction readings--which the Grinder doesn't yet.

David, thanks for providing us with the Grinder. I've been a user throughout 2014 and I don't miss Duotrope one bit.

Keep up the good work.

Personally I've found Duotrope a superior service. I'm on a very frugal budget, but I'm always willing to use my spare change to put money into an industry that has struggled in recent years. Mostly this involves buying new books whenever I can afford it, with the occasional SF magazine thrown in.

But if it is a submission tracking service such as Duotrope - which in my view is the best one going around by far - then I'm willing to support that, as well.

I used Duotrope until it went paid, then switched to the shiny new Grinder. I liked Duotrope, but I love the Grinder's shiny graphs with my purple dots venturing through the red hills of doom.

I have no experience of Duotrope, so I can't make a comparison. However I can report positive effects of The Grinder include very significantly increasing my submission rate by pointing me in the direction of new potential markets that sometimes I hadn't even heard of.

For residents outside the US it can be quite difficult to identify and get a feel for US publications. Since these dominate the market this is a big problem. The result was a very slow turn around rate whilst I struggled to find another home for a rejected story. Sometimes I gave up on stories after a few rejections because the process was so very slow that I just forgot about them.

I only recently signed up for The Grinder, but I currently have 29 stories on submission (from flash to 12,000 words) and one pitched to an imprint, making 30 simultaneously in the wild. Of course this volume tends to mean that I get rejections in batches, but I also get positive vibes with more frequency too. It remains to be seen whether any of this turns into sales. These have been elusive. At least I know I'm trying my best though.

The Grinder is full of awesomeness.

I don't miss Duotrope at all. Well, not much. Well, only occasionally. Well, okay, maybe a teeny tiny bit. Well, okay, quite a lot when your story is 119 days at AE and as such is the longest outstanding sub on the grinder and you can't help wondering what the figures are on Duotrope...

Um. There there. *Thunk. Thunk*

*Nice Elinor chokes on her cup of tea*

I only recently signed up for The Grinder, but I currently have 29 stories on submission (from flash to 12,000 words) and one pitched to an imprint, making 30 simultaneously in the wild. Of course this volume tends to mean that I get rejections in batches, but I also get positive vibes with more frequency too. It remains to be seen whether any of this turns into sales. These have been elusive. At least I know I'm trying my best though.

29 stories? Mate, you're a machine.

29 stories? Mate, you're a machine.

Not really. A lot of them a re-writes of earlier pieces that had been stalled for want of a market and the shortest is a mere 350 word flash piece. However I did send two more out yesterday, one of which is a 13,500 novelette, heavily revised from an earlier WotF submission from which great things were expected but not obtained. So I'm now 31 stories and one pitch in the wild. Five of the stories are now orange and five red on The Grinder, but I attribute a lot of that to seasonal factors. I just hope none are actually lost without trace - that wouldn't be the first time.

At this time of year in my part of the world it's very cold and hardly ever proper daylight. This is an incentive to stay in and write. In the summer I probably shan't do much. Unless, that is, the market suddenly realises my genius and demands more.

If a breakthrough depends on volume and determination not to quit, this tactic will work. If my stuff really isn't commercial then of course it won't. Either way, the results will soon be statistically significant.

<img src="

Reviving this wondering what the state of things is right now. I have accounts on both platforms. I had one on Duotrope when it was free, and recently just made one on Grinder.

Just found this thread because I was wondering about something related. I see more Grinder submissions (compared to Duotrope) reported for the markets I am sending stories to. But what I was really wonder is whether pretty much all the "serious" authors are using Grinder or Duotrope. I suspect they are and, therefore, the records capture most of the writers who will be getting acceptances and upper-tier rejections? I'd like to think that the unresolved stories I'm looking at on these websites show most of the stories still under consideration.

My question sounds a bit confusing. Stated another way: Are there a lot of good writers who are not using either the Grinder or Duotrope and, therefore, the number of unresolved stories reported on the websites is a big understatement of those seriously in the running.

The WotF entries aren't a good guide I think because the entries come from a very wide cross-section of the population--not just persons who would call themselves serious writers.

Just found this thread because I was wondering about something related. I see more Grinder submissions (compared to Duotrope) reported for the markets I am sending stories to. But what I was really wonder is whether pretty much all the "serious" authors are using Grinder or Duotrope. I suspect they are and, therefore, the records capture most of the writers who will be getting acceptances and upper-tier rejections? I'd like to think that the unresolved stories I'm looking at on these websites show most of the stories still under consideration.

My question sounds a bit confusing. Stated another way: Are there a lot of good writers who are not using either the Grinder or Duotrope and, therefore, the number of unresolved stories reported on the websites is a big understatement of those seriously in the running.

The WotF entries aren't a good guide I think because the entries come from a very wide cross-section of the population--not just persons who would call themselves serious writers.

On that last point, I'd think that's the case for most markets.

I know a pro published writer who doesn't use Grinder or Duotrope and have seen blog posts of others who use their own system to track submissions and rejections. I have my own system so even if I used Grinder or Duotrope to find markets, I probably wouldn't use them for tracking. I don't trust online systems after experiences of lost data in the past. Always keep a backup! Generally, I know more people who use Grinder (both published and unpublished) but of course that's all anecdotal.

The fact Duotrope lists more (wide-ranging) markets than Grinder but Duotrope is paid-only adds other factors to who will use it and why. Markets can also be found via many other means, such as Submittable, Ralan, Twitter and Authors Publish.

Grinder is awesome. Dave set that whole thing up when Duotrope went paid. I just cried in my beer - he set up an alternative!

He has a Patreon... Since I'm not officially endorsing/requesting, etc, etc, I won't post a link. But if you feel so moved, it's under Diabolical Plots.

Grinder is awesome. Dave set that whole thing up when Duotrope went paid. I just cried in my beer - he set up an alternative!

He has a Patreon... Since I'm not officially endorsing/requesting, etc, etc, I won't post a link. But if you feel so moved, it's under Diabolical Plots.

I didn't know he was behind it. That's awesome.

I know a pro published writer who doesn't use Grinder or Duotrope and have seen blog posts of others who use their own system to track submissions and rejections. I have my own system so even if I used Grinder or Duotrope to find markets, I probably wouldn't use them for tracking. I don't trust online systems after experiences of lost data in the past. Always keep a backup! Generally, I know more people who use Grinder (both published and unpublished) but of course that's all anecdotal.

I agree with the "Always keep a backup!" and I feel like I should point out that this can go both ways--I use my own system as well as the Grinder, and I've had to use the Grinder to recreate lost data when my computer ate my other system (which is a spreadsheet). So the online system can be the backup too!

I can't really comment on the larger question because I've never used Duotrope, but I enjoy submitomancing with both the Grinder and my own records (and whatever other information I can glean from the internet)

Alex, Beth,

I had not really thought about the possibility of losing my data. I may need to have a backup. I used to have a spreadsheet until I found Grinder. Had Duotrope for a while but never really used it--I just wanted to see what it was like. I like Grinder better. Particularly the chart and the ability to see the number of submissions per day broken down between pending and rejected.

I had not really thought about the possibility of losing my data. I may need to have a backup.

A couple of years ago I lost my laptop to ransomeware. I was certain I had lost the stories that were stored there and being my earliest efforts I hated losing them.
Late last year I was checking my thumb drive inventories and found the stories I thought were lost. Long story short, save your stuff!

Oh, back to the topic of this thread, I'm a fan of The Grinder.

Alex, Beth,

I had not really thought about the possibility of losing my data. I may need to have a backup. I used to have a spreadsheet until I found Grinder. Had Duotrope for a while but never really used it--I just wanted to see what it was like. I like Grinder better. Particularly the chart and the ability to see the number of submissions per day broken down between pending and rejected.

I had forgotten about this, but an easy way to back up your data if you're using the Grinder is just to export it periodically. You can do this on the "Manage Submissions" page: underneath the filter options box is a "Generate Export File" button, which will get a you spreadsheet of whatever submissions you have it filtered to show (so if you want them all, check all the boxes)

[
I had forgotten about this, but an easy way to back up your data if you're using the Grinder is just to export it periodically. You can do this on the "Manage Submissions" page: underneath the filter options box is a "Generate Export File" button, which will get a you spreadsheet of whatever submissions you have it filtered to show (so if you want them all, check all the boxes)

Get outa Town! Thanks Beth.

Happy to help!

Been thinking about checking out one of those. Back before it was pay I sort of used Duotrope to keep track of markets but I didn't like the color coding they used. Another site I found more to my liking even though no one around seemed to use it. But now that site if offline and I assume no more so I could use another one that keeps track of markets. Keeping track of my stories I can do. It still have to type in my story and what happened to it so I can do that.