Reach120 vs TOEFLMock: the 2026-format comparison, with its evidence attached
It is where a search for free TOEFL mock tests usually lands, and the choice between the two products is really a choice between two kinds of feedback: a person reading your answer and sending a band back afterwards, or a model returning the whole report the moment you submit. Which one is right depends on how many attempts you plan to make and how much time you have left. This page separates them on the axes you can actually check, and says where its own evidence runs out.
Who wrote this, and how to read it
Read on 2026-08-06, without an account, buying nothing and accessing no paywalled surface. Free allowances and prices change faster than pages like this one do, so treat every figure as dated evidence rather than a current quote.
- There is no score, no rating and no verdict. There are no star ratings in this page or in its structured data — Reach120 has no published review corpus, so a rating would be a number we made up.
- What TOEFLMock does better is stated plainly, because a comparison that finds nothing good in the other product is an advertisement.
- Reach120 prices are not typed on this page. The pricing page is the only place they are stated, so there is one thing to keep correct rather than fourteen.
Reach120 and TOEFLMock, side by side
The spine of this table is the six task types the January 2026 format introduced, because coverage is the one axis with checkable evidence: either a public page names the task or it does not. Everything else — free access, metering, price, scoring transparency — is quoted.
| 2026 task type | Reach120 | TOEFLMock |
|---|---|---|
| Build a SentenceWriting | Runs it here | Named on their page |
| Write an EmailWriting | Runs it here | Named on their page |
| Academic DiscussionWriting | Runs it here | Named on their page |
| Listen & RepeatSpeaking | Runs it here | Named on their page |
| Take an InterviewSpeaking | Runs it here | Named on their page |
| Complete the WordsReading | Runs it here | Named on their page |
How the TOEFLMock column was filled: All six are named on the homepage. Its FAQ describes Reading as "Complete the Words ... Read in Daily Life ... and Academic Passages", Writing as "Build a Sentence (10 items ...), Write an Email ... and Academic Discussion", and Speaking as "Listen & Repeat (7 items ...)" and "Take an Interview (4 pre-recorded video questions ...)"; the lesson catalogue names each of the six again. That is the page naming them; no account was created to watch them run.
| What you are comparing | Reach120 | TOEFLMock |
|---|---|---|
| Free access | Reading and Listening practice is free with no daily limit and no lifetime limit. Write an Email, Write for an Academic Discussion and Take an Interview share 1 AI-scored credit a day; Listen & Repeat has its own allowance of 3 a day. Published questions, answers, transcripts, sample responses and PDF packs need no account. | Two pages of the same site state different things, both read on 2026-08-06. The pricing page states "The first test in every section and the first full test are free, with full expert feedback on Speaking and Writing", its FAQ counting "Five free starter tests in total ... No card required", plus the first lesson of each of the four courses free to read. The "How We Evaluate" page states "Completely Free. Always.", "All 34 practice tests across every section and difficulty level — no paywalls, no trial periods" and "Ad-Supported ... No subscriptions. No hidden charges." Both sentences are published; this row picks neither, because the page that takes payment and the page that describes the service disagree and only one of them charges you. |
| How AI use is metered | The free tier is metered by measured cost — the three tasks that spend a model on your own words share one daily credit. A paid pass carries a stated fair-use ceiling rather than an open-ended promise. | No credit meter and no per-action cost is stated anywhere we read. All three tiers state "Unlimited expert evaluations on Writing & Speaking", with Reading and Listening "auto-graded instantly"; the 45 Practice Lessons are stated as included on Monthly and Premium and explicitly excluded from Weekly. |
| Price, as their page stated it | Exam passes are one-time and do not auto-renew; the current prices are on the pricing page, which this page reads rather than restates. | The pricing page lists three subscription tiers — "$8 / week", "$20 / month" and "$50 / 75 days" — and its FAQ states "All prices are in USD" and that each tier auto-renews on its own cadence: weekly every 7 days, monthly every 30 days, premium every 75 days. The same FAQ states subscriptions are "non-refundable, including for unused periods or renewals you forgot to cancel", with double charges and charges after a cancellation refunded as billing errors, and that subscribers from before 2026-05-16 "keep their original $14 monthly rate for as long as their subscription stays active". Checkout is stated as Razorpay — card, netbanking or wallet — or PayPal. Institutional pricing is quote-based: the page offers "bulk seat licensing, cohort-level analytics" and its FAQ states "bulk discounts up to 60%". |
| Scoring transparency | How a score is produced, and what the language model is and is not allowed to do with it, is published at /methodology. No scorer-versus-human agreement figure is published: the internal benchmark corpus is too small to publish as an accuracy claim. | It publishes more method than most of this set: a "How We Evaluate" page listing the criteria per section and a table converting each 0–5 task score to a 1–6 band and a CEFR level. Two gaps a reader should notice. It asserts "You get the same band ETS would give" without publishing any comparison against real score reports, and no third party has access to ETS’s scoring engines. And its own FAQ question "Who evaluates my responses?" is answered by describing the rubric rather than by naming who does the evaluating. Reach120 publishes no agreement figure either — its benchmark corpus is too small to publish one honestly — but it does publish how a score is produced. |
Every TOEFLMock cell above is a sentence their own public page stated, read on 2026-08-06. Prices and free allowances move; check the source before you buy. Reach120's own prices are not typed here — the pricing page is the only place they are stated.
What TOEFLMock does better
Three things, plainly. Its Writing and Speaking answers are stated to be read by human evaluators against the rubric, where Reach120 scores with a model — a person reading your response is a different product, not a worse one, and it is the thing a model cannot substitute for. It publishes 45 structured lessons that teach the method behind each 2026 task type, which Reach120 does not have in any form. And it takes payment through Razorpay as well as PayPal, so a card that fails one gateway can go through the other, which matters in more countries than a single-processor checkout admits.
Where Reach120 is different
Reach120 publishes the questions, the answers, the transcripts and the sample responses in the page itself, readable in view-source with no account; TOEFLMock’s material sits inside its test player and its results arrive through a private emailed link. On scoring, TOEFLMock states human evaluation against the rubric, while Reach120 scores with a model, documents how at /methodology, and returns the report immediately. Worth stating plainly because it shapes the whole comparison: the word "AI" appears nowhere on TOEFLMock’s homepage, pricing page or How We Evaluate page as read on 2026-08-06, so this is a comparison of turnaround and transparency, not of whose model is better.
Different is not better in the abstract. The difference matters only if it matches what you are short of — time, money, feedback, or lessons.
Where Reach120 is weaker, in its own words: This page makes no case for its own product over the others. Where Reach120 is weaker: there are no taught video lessons, no human tutor review of a response, no coverage of any exam other than the TOEFL test, fewer free AI-scored submissions a day than PrepEx states, and no published scorer-versus-human agreement figure — the internal benchmark corpus is too small to publish as an accuracy claim, so it is not published.
Which one to choose
- Choose TOEFLMock if what it does better is what you are short of. That sentence is above, unedited, and it is the whole reason this section can be brief.
- Choose Reach120 if you want to read the practice material and its answers before creating anything, and you want the four sections in one place with the method published.
- Choose both if the budget allows. They are not mutually exclusive, and nobody preparing for an exam owes one vendor loyalty.
Before either: Four things its own pages do not settle. Whether it is free at all: the pricing page sells three subscriptions and counts five free starter tests, while the How We Evaluate page states the service is free always and ad-supported — settle it at checkout rather than from either page. How long feedback takes: the same site states under 30 minutes, 1–2 hours and 24–48 hours across four sentences. What "the same band ETS would give" rests on: the site publishes its criteria and its task-score-to-band table, which is more than most publish, but no comparison against real score reports, and no third party has access to ETS’s scoring engines. And the renewal terms: every tier auto-renews and payments are stated non-refundable outside billing errors.
Sources, and what we could not read
- TOEFLMock pricing page — https://www.toeflmocktests.com/pricing/, read 2026-08-06.
- TOEFLMock homepage — https://www.toeflmocktests.com/, read 2026-08-06.
- TOEFLMock "How We Evaluate" page — https://www.toeflmocktests.com/how-we-evaluate/, read 2026-08-06.
TOEFLMock states the following about itself. These are their words, quoted, and this page does not verify them:
- "Every Speaking and Writing answer is scored against the official TOEFL 1–6 rubric, with detailed feedback on what to fix next. You get the same band ETS would give."
- "80+ full-length tests & section drills" and "Aligned with the 2026 TOEFL iBT format" on the pricing page, against "All 34 practice tests across every section and difficulty level" on the How We Evaluate page.
- Four different turnaround sentences were live on the same date: "Expert feedback in 1–2 hours" and "returned within 24 to 48 hours" on the pricing page, "Typical turnaround is under 30 minutes" and "Most evaluations are completed within 24-48 hours" on the How We Evaluate page.
Reach120 vs TOEFLMock: common questions
- Is TOEFLMock better than Reach120?
- This page does not answer that, and no page published by one of the two products honestly could. What it gives you instead is the evidence to answer it yourself: what each states about free access, price and 2026 task coverage, quoted from the page it was read from on 2026-08-06, plus a plain statement of what TOEFLMock does better — Three things, plainly. Its Writing and Speaking answers are stated to be read by human evaluators against the rubric, where Reach120 scores with a model — a person reading your response is a different product, not a worse one, and it is the thing a model cannot substitute for. It publishes 45 structured lessons that teach the method behind each 2026 task type, which Reach120 does not have in any form. And it takes payment through Razorpay as well as PayPal, so a card that fails one gateway can go through the other, which matters in more countries than a single-processor checkout admits.
- What does TOEFLMock cost?
- On 2026-08-06, their own page stated: The pricing page lists three subscription tiers — "$8 / week", "$20 / month" and "$50 / 75 days" — and its FAQ states "All prices are in USD" and that each tier auto-renews on its own cadence: weekly every 7 days, monthly every 30 days, premium every 75 days. The same FAQ states subscriptions are "non-refundable, including for unused periods or renewals you forgot to cancel", with double charges and charges after a cancellation refunded as billing errors, and that subscribers from before 2026-05-16 "keep their original $14 monthly rate for as long as their subscription stays active". Checkout is stated as Razorpay — card, netbanking or wallet — or PayPal. Institutional pricing is quote-based: the page offers "bulk seat licensing, cohort-level analytics" and its FAQ states "bulk discounts up to 60%". Prices and sales move, so check the page itself before paying.
- Can I use Reach120 free instead of paying for TOEFLMock?
- You can use a large part of it free and decide afterwards. Reading and Listening practice is free with no daily limit and no lifetime limit. Write an Email, Write for an Academic Discussion and Take an Interview share 1 AI-scored credit a day; Listen & Repeat has its own allowance of 3 a day. Published questions, answers, transcripts, sample responses and PDF packs need no account.
- Does TOEFLMock cover the 2026 TOEFL task types?
- Here is what we could establish rather than what we assume: All six are named on the homepage. Its FAQ describes Reading as "Complete the Words ... Read in Daily Life ... and Academic Passages", Writing as "Build a Sentence (10 items ...), Write an Email ... and Academic Discussion", and Speaking as "Listen & Repeat (7 items ...)" and "Take an Interview (4 pre-recorded video questions ...)"; the lesson catalogue names each of the six again. That is the page naming them; no account was created to watch them run. A blank cell in the table on this page means we found no public statement, not that the feature is missing.
- Who publishes this comparison?
- Reach120 does, and Reach120 is one of the two products in it. That is disclosed at the top rather than buried, every competitor fact carries the URL and date it came from, and the section stating what TOEFLMock does better is mandatory on every page in this set. Nothing here is sponsored and TOEFLMock did not review it. If you believe a fact on this page is wrong or out of date, tell us and we will re-read the source.