Extraction.app

Extraction.app is a web-based document-extraction service that combines OCR and AI models to turn PDFs, scans, images and office files into structured JSON, CSV or Excel. Users upload a document, describe the fields they want, and download the structured result. The current product supports PDFs, Word files, Excel files and common image formats, including scanned and image-based documents.¹

A particularly useful workflow is “Fill My Spreadsheet”: users upload an existing Excel template, map extracted fields to its columns and download a populated workbook while preserving the original formatting and formulas. Higher tiers also expose REST API access, batch extraction and automation workflows.¹²

The service positions itself as a no-template alternative to traditional OCR/document-parser systems. First-party use-case pages claim support for complex tables, forms, handwriting and multilingual OCR. Those capabilities are plausible and relevant, but the current evidence reviewed here does not include an independent benchmark confirming the published accuracy figures across representative document sets.¹

The current annual-billing prices are transparent. Free includes 50 extractions per month and documents up to 5 MB. Starter is $17/month billed annually for 1,500 extractions and files up to 10 MB. Basic is $67/month billed annually for 7,500 extractions, files up to 15 MB and 60-day history. Pro is $275/month billed annually with unlimited extractions, files up to 25 MB, advanced OCR for complex tables, batch extraction and unlimited history.³

The pricing page says annual billing saves 20% and users must upgrade after exceeding a plan limit. REST API availability is listed from Starter upward on the pricing page, while the dedicated API-integration page currently says a Pro account is required before generating an API key. That inconsistency should be clarified before a team buys a lower tier specifically for API use.³²

First-party documentation is detailed, but independent product evidence is thin. The site publishes strong claims such as 99% extraction accuracy, very large speed improvements versus manual processing and support for difficult scans, handwriting and complex tables. A company-authored OCR comparison also reports specific accuracy results against Tesseract and ABBYY. These figures are useful for understanding the intended performance envelope, but they are not independent validation and should not be treated as benchmark-grade evidence.¹

The public product pages say documents are processed securely and one PDF use-case page states that documents are never stored. At the same time, the pricing structure includes 60-day or unlimited history on higher plans, indicating that at least extraction history or associated data can persist. The available public material therefore supports a general security claim but is not sufficiently precise here to establish detailed retention behavior for every workflow.¹³

Independent exact-product evidence remains weak. Major software-review, technology and benchmark sources do not currently provide a substantive exact-product review, benchmark or mature user-rating corpus for Extraction.app. That absence is not negative evidence, but it limits confidence in broad claims about accuracy, reliability and user satisfaction.

Extraction.app is best suited to teams handling heterogeneous documents where fixed templates are brittle: invoices from multiple vendors, financial statements, scanned forms, contracts, reports, receipts and image-based records. It is also relevant when the output needs to flow directly into an existing spreadsheet or an automation pipeline rather than stop at plain OCR text.¹²

It is less compelling when documents are perfectly standardized and a deterministic parser already works reliably, or when an organization needs independently validated accuracy, detailed enterprise governance or contractual security guarantees before adopting a document-processing service.