Direct comparison
Google Docs vs Overleaf vs Word
Compare Google Docs, Overleaf, and Word for co-authored manuscripts: editing, track changes, citation tools, LaTeX support, and journal fit.
Side-by-side comparison
| Dimension | Google Docs | Overleaf | Microsoft Word |
|---|---|---|---|
| Editing model | Cloud-native rich-text word processor; autosaves to Google Drive | Cloud-native LaTeX editor; renders formatted output from source code (or Rich Text mode for less technical co-authors) | Desktop-first word processor with cloud co-authoring via Word for the web / OneDrive / SharePoint |
| Real-time simultaneous editing | Yes, native and mature — multiple authors, live cursors, no setup | Yes, native — multiple authors edit the same .tex source simultaneously with live cursors | Yes, but the file must be saved to OneDrive/SharePoint first; desktop Word and Word for the web behave slightly differently |
| Track changes / suggested edits | Suggesting mode — the direct equivalent of Track Changes, with inline accept/reject | Track Changes is a paid-plan feature; the free plan has only basic revision history, not an accept/reject workflow | Track Changes — the original implementation and still the most granular (per-reviewer colour coding, formatting-change tracking) |
| Comments & threaded discussion | Inline comments with @mentions, resolve/reopen threads, email notifications | Inline comments tied to specific source lines, plus a project chat panel | Inline comments with @mentions via Microsoft 365; threading is less granular than Google Docs |
| Version history | Full revision history; named versions; restore any prior version | Full project history is a paid-plan feature; the free plan retains only a limited recent window | Version history via OneDrive/SharePoint for cloud-saved files; local-only files have no automatic history |
| Math / equation support | Built-in equation editor with LaTeX-like syntax for individual equations; not a full LaTeX engine | Full LaTeX typesetting engine — this is the native format, not an add-on | Built-in equation editor supporting LaTeX-syntax input; not a LaTeX compiler |
| Citation-manager integration | Zotero has an official Google Docs plugin (the only one of the three major managers to offer one); Mendeley Cite and EndNote do not support Google Docs | No native Zotero/Mendeley/EndNote plugin; citations are managed via an uploaded .bib file and LaTeX citation commands | All three integrate natively: Zotero, Mendeley Cite, and EndNote’s Cite While You Write |
| Figures & tables | Drag-and-drop images and a native table tool; layout can shift slightly on export | Inserted via LaTeX code or a rich-text figure tool; placement stays consistent with the compiled journal template | Native WYSIWYG image and table insertion with direct layout control |
| Journal submission format | Must be exported to .docx or PDF; most journal systems accept a Docs-exported .docx | Compiles directly to a submission-ready PDF; many journals (Springer, IEEE, Elsevier, PLOS, and others) publish official Overleaf-hosted templates matched to their formatting requirements | .docx is the most universally accepted manuscript-submission format across systems like ScholarOne and Editorial Manager |
| Collaborators / cost | Free with a Google account; no per-collaborator limit | Free plan limits a project to one collaborator besides the owner; paid Standard/Student plans raise this to 10, Professional removes the cap | Requires a Microsoft 365 subscription (or free Word for the web) for cloud co-authoring; no Overleaf-style per-project collaborator cap |
| Compiling / build step | None — WYSIWYG, no compilation | Requires compiling the .tex source to view formatted output; free plan caps compile time at 10 seconds, paid plans at 240 seconds | None — WYSIWYG |
| Offline access | Available via the offline Chrome extension; changes sync on reconnect | Git integration and a desktop sync tool support offline work for advanced users; no simple offline mode for casual editing | Full offline editing in desktop Word; cloud co-authoring requires reconnecting to sync |
| Learning curve for non-technical co-authors | Minimal — the same interface as any word processor | Steepest — requires at least basic LaTeX syntax familiarity, though Rich Text mode softens this for simple edits | Minimal — the most widely taught word processor |
| Best fit | Fast-moving early drafts with a mixed-discipline, mixed-technical-comfort author list | Math-, physics-, CS-, or engineering-heavy manuscripts already targeting a LaTeX-template journal, or teams that want Git-based version control | Teams standardized on Microsoft 365, or manuscripts headed to journals/reviewers who expect a .docx with visible Track Changes |
Common questions
FAQ
Can I switch between these tools mid-draft?+
Technically yes, but each conversion loses fidelity — Overleaf's LaTeX source doesn't convert cleanly to Word's or Google Docs' rich-text formatting, and equations, cross-references, and bibliography styles are the most common casualties. Deciding on a primary drafting tool before the first full draft is easier than migrating midway.
Which tool keeps the cleanest record of who wrote what?+
Word's Track Changes and Google Docs' version history both attribute edits to named collaborators automatically. Overleaf attributes edits by collaborator in its project history, but only paid plans retain that history for more than a short recent window — free-plan teams shouldn't rely on it as a record of contribution.
Do any of the three integrate with reference managers automatically?+
Word integrates natively with Zotero, Mendeley Cite, and EndNote's Cite While You Write. Google Docs has an official Zotero plugin, but not Mendeley or EndNote. Overleaf has no native reference-manager plugin — citations are managed by uploading a .bib file and citing with LaTeX commands.
Is Overleaf only useful for math-heavy fields?+
It's most valuable where a journal supplies an official LaTeX template (common in physics, mathematics, computer science, and much of engineering) or where precise equation typesetting matters. Outside those fields, Google Docs or Word usually involves less overhead for the same result.
