Try Free →
AI-powered predatory journal checker

You found a journal.
Now check it before you submit.

Free Scopus record check in seconds. Full journal risk analysis when the record isn't enough.

48,000+ Scopus titles, updated monthly
Researchers in 40+ countries
$100K+ saved in APC fees
6–12 months saved per researcher
Free check · No signup

One check before you submit could save you thousands of dollars and months of work.

Start with a free Scopus record check. Get your result in seconds.

We'll email you a copy of your result

Enter a journal name and your email.

Free · No card required

Searching the Scopus Source List…
Why this matters

How do I know if a journal is predatory?
Here's the reality.

Publishing in the wrong journal can set your career back by a year. These are the numbers.

6–12
months lost on average when a researcher publishes in a predatory journal
$1,800
average APC lost per predatory journal submission
Based on known predatory APC ranges
15,000+
active predatory journals operating today
Beall's List & Cabell's Reports
$2B+
lost annually to predatory journals worldwide
Grudniewicz et al., Nature 2019
⚠️
What are the signs of a predatory journal? Publishing in one doesn't just waste money. It can damage your academic reputation, disqualify you from grants, and make your research invisible — Scopus and Web of Science do not index predatory journals. Your work simply won't be found.
Beall's list alternative

How to check journal credibility when blacklists fail

By the time a journal ends up on a blacklist, thousands of researchers have already been hurt. Arxivia analyzes live — publication trends, real article quality, actual scope alignment — at the exact moment of your request. No static database. No outdated entries. That's how to identify a predatory journal before it's too late.

Analyzes the journal's live website at the moment of your request — not a static database entry from years ago
Detects paper mills through publication volume spikes — the clearest signal a fake journal checker always misses
AI evaluates real abstracts from recent issues — not self-reported journal data
Cross-references Scopus records with the journal's own claims — this is how to verify if a journal is genuinely Scopus indexed
Detects fake impact factors and misleading metric claims — a common tactic in predatory journal scam operations
How it works

Four steps, under 5 minutes

🔗
Paste journal URL
Drop the official homepage link. Add ISSN or journal name for extra precision.
30 seconds
💳
Pay securely
From $25 per journal. Stripe checkout. Credits never expire — use them anytime.
Secure · Stripe
🤖
AI runs the check
Live Scopus lookup, publication spike detection, abstract quality scoring, scope alignment.
2–4 minutes
📄
PDF lands in your inbox
Safe / Caution / Danger verdict with a full breakdown. Clear, actionable, no jargon.
In your inbox
Sample report

This is what you receive

A clear, actionable PDF — not a raw data dump

arxivia.ai · Risk Analysis Report · April 2025

International Journal of Applied Sciences

ISSN 2345-6789 · ijas-publishing.org · Publisher: Global Science Media Ltd

0.6CiteScore 2025
Q3Quartile
51stPercentile
Applied SciencesSubject area

Rank #489/1,050 in Applied Sciences

41 /100

High risk

Multiple risk signals detected. We recommend finding a safer alternative before submitting your manuscript.

Detailed analysis

Criterion Finding Status
Publication dynamics 2022: 8 · 2023: 14 · 2024: 22 — largest year-over-year change +184% High risk
Aims & scope alignment Several recent articles diverge from the journal's declared scope in applied physical sciences. Danger
Abstract quality Several abstracts lack concrete methodology or results, appearing templated across topics. Danger
Publisher verification Site shows 'Global Science Media Ltd' · Scopus record: 'Global Science Media Ltd'. Safe
Article count cross-check 2023–2025 — site: 68 articles · Scopus: 47 indexed · difference 31% High risk

High risk — proceed with caution

This journal shows a fee-driven volume pattern and a notable gap between site-listed and Scopus-indexed articles. Consider a safer alternative before submitting.

Pricing

Simple, pay-per-use

No subscription. No expiry. Credits are yours to use anytime.

Check
$25
1 journal analysis
  • Full risk PDF report
  • AI-powered analysis
  • Safe / Danger verdict
  • Delivered by email
Most popular
Guard
$49 save 35%
3 journals · ~$16 each
  • Everything in Check
  • 3 credits, use anytime
  • Credits never expire
  • Personal dashboard
Fortress
$75 save 40%
5 journals · ~$15 each
  • Everything in Guard
  • 5 credits, use anytime
  • Best value per analysis
  • Priority support
What researchers say

How accurate are predatory journal checkers?
These researchers found out firsthand.

★★★★★

My colleagues lost more than $10,000 to predatory journals last year, and essentially a year of work for nothing. I pay APCs out of my own pocket, so I was genuinely afraid of ending up in the same situation.

I was under time pressure, and colleagues recommended a journal that promised a fast turnaround. The fee wasn't small, $1,200, but I still had doubts, so I checked it through Arxivia's AI Journal Risk Analyzer. The report immediately flagged clear predatory red flags, so I walked away.

Two months later, that journal was delisted from Scopus, along with every indexed article. Thank you, Arxivia 🙏, this tool saved me $1,200 and a year of my life.

Dr Gabriel Edem
Dr Gabriel Edem
Researcher · University of Uyo, Nigeria
ORCID: Not found
🇳🇬
★★★★★

The predatory journal problem has become especially serious in academia in recent years. I had doubts about a journal I was considering, so I decided to check it with Risk Analyzer.

What convinced me most was how detailed the report actually was: a clear analysis of the journal's publication trends over time, whether its articles matched its stated aims and scope, the quality of its abstracts, and a check on the publisher itself and how many articles were indexed. That's far deeper than a simple 'safe' or 'risky', I could actually see what the conclusion was based on.

The journal turned out to be safe, so I submitted my paper with real peace of mind. ✅

Muhammad Rheza Ramadhan
Muhammad Rheza Ramadhan
Researcher · Ministry of Finance / PKN STAN, Indonesia
ORCID: 0009-0007-1559-0591
🇮🇩
★★★★★

I've been publishing for a long time, and more than once in the past I ended up in predatory journals, which is a genuinely unpleasant experience. Predatory venues are especially active in the social sciences.

I publish 4–6 papers a year, and after that bad experience I'm always afraid of repeating the mistake, predatory journals get craftier every year. With this tool, I no longer worry: every journal is checked against concrete parameters, publication dynamics, topical fit, publisher reputation, instead of just getting a verdict with no explanation. 🔎

Liudmyla Novoskoltseva
Liudmyla Novoskoltseva
Head of Department, Associate Professor · Taras Shevchenko Luhansk National University, Ukraine
ORCID: 0000-0003-1082-7979
🇺🇦

Don't let the wrong journal
cost you a year of your career

5 minutes and $25 is all it takes to know for certain.
Your next submission deserves a clean start.

PDF in 2–5 min · Secure Stripe payment · Credits never expire
Common questions

Everything you need to know

Answers to the most common questions about journal safety checking.

A predatory journal typically shows multiple red flags: unusually fast peer review (days, not weeks), aggressive unsolicited emails, vague or overly broad aims and scope, suspicious publication volume spikes, and false or unverifiable indexing claims. Arxivia's AI checks all of these in real time, so you don't have to manually cross-reference five different sources.
The most common signs: (1) falsely claiming Scopus or Web of Science indexing; (2) abnormal growth in published articles year-over-year; (3) abstracts with low academic quality across recent issues; (4) mismatch between the journal's stated scope and what it actually publishes; (5) publisher name that doesn't match the Scopus registry; (6) fake impact factors or invented metrics like "Global Impact Factor." Our journal safety checker detects all of these automatically.
Yes — this is one of the most dangerous situations. A journal can be legitimately indexed in Scopus and still behave predatorially: accepting low-quality work for money, inflating citation counts, or being on the verge of removal. Arxivia's predatory journal detector goes beyond indexing status — it analyzes publication dynamics and actual content quality that Scopus data alone won't show you.
To independently verify Scopus indexing: go to scopus.com/sources and search by ISSN or journal name. A journal claiming Scopus indexing but not appearing there is a major red flag. Arxivia performs this cross-check automatically and also flags journals that were previously indexed but have since been removed.
Publishing in a predatory journal can: damage your academic reputation with peer reviewers and hiring committees; disqualify your work from grant applications that require indexed publications; make your research effectively invisible (since it won't appear in Scopus or Web of Science searches); and in some institutions, result in your publication not counting toward promotion requirements. In the worst cases, retraction from a predatory journal can raise questions about your other work too.
Traditional checkers (like Beall's List or Cabell's) work from static databases — once a journal is added, they're accurate for that entry, but they miss emerging threats entirely. Arxivia analyzes each journal dynamically at the moment of your request, which means we catch journals that are actively becoming predatory right now — before they appear on any list. This approach is inherently more accurate for current risk assessment.
Because it works. Scopus indexing is seen as a quality signal by researchers, particularly in Global South markets where publication in an indexed journal is required for promotion. Predatory publishers exploit this by falsely listing Scopus on their website — either claiming they are indexed when they aren't, or continuing to display it after being delisted. Some even create convincing-looking fake Scopus profile pages. Our journal scam detector cross-references live Scopus data to catch exactly this.
The official Impact Factor is calculated by Clarivate Analytics and only applies to Web of Science-indexed journals. Predatory journals invent alternative-sounding metrics — "Global Impact Factor," "Universal Impact Factor," "Index Copernicus Value" — that look official but are either self-reported, purchased from commercial databases with no real methodology, or completely fabricated. These fake metrics are specifically designed to mislead authors unfamiliar with what legitimate indexing looks like.
Classic predatory journal invitation emails typically: address you by name but got your contact from a random academic database; praise your "recent work" without specifying which paper; offer extremely short submission deadlines (days or weeks); promise rapid peer review (under 2 weeks); claim impact factors or indexing you can't verify; and come from domains that don't match the journal's official site. If you received such an email, run the journal through Arxivia before responding.
Three reliable methods: (1) Search the official Scopus Sources list by ISSN or journal name; (2) Contact your university library — they have access to full Scopus title lists; (3) Use Arxivia's predatory journal detector, which automatically performs this verification as part of the full risk analysis. Never rely solely on what the journal's own website claims.
Ask Arxi