It's a shame its product sucks so bad. I see compliments here, but every test I've done comes up terribly short. Perhaps the bar is set rather low because people are comparing it to Microsoft Word's built-in tools, which are so incompetent they're easy to improve upon. And I say this a linguist and lexicographer who has written three language-related books. Many copyeditors I know, too, find themselves having to clean up Grammarly's work when an author uses it on an MS to decrease the amount of work/money needed for a copyeditor.