Written and maintained by CASRAI Editorial Board
Last updated
Researchers and research-support staff run into PDFs constantly — redacting participant identifiers before sharing a dataset, marking up a manuscript draft from a co-author, combining a paper with its supplementary appendices before submission. Adobe Acrobat Pro is the default most people reach for, largely out of habit, but it is not the only serious option. Foxit PDF Editor is a longstanding competitor with its own redaction, annotation, and document-assembly tools, and it offers a free trial that lets you test those specific workflows before paying for anything. This guide walks through what that trial actually covers when you point it at real research tasks, not marketing-page feature lists.
What the Foxit PDF Editor free trial actually includes
As of August 2026, Foxit’s free trial runs 14 days, no credit card required, and installs the full desktop application — you are not testing a stripped-down demo tier. During the trial you get the complete editing, annotation, redaction, OCR, and document-assembly toolset that ships with a paid Foxit PDF Editor license, including the AI-assisted Smart Redact feature that is otherwise bundled specifically with the PDF Editor+ tier. That matters for evaluation purposes: you can actually test the redaction workflow you’d use in production, not a watermarked or feature-capped preview.
What the trial does not clearly resolve, and what Foxit’s own marketing pages don’t spell out in plain language, is what happens to files you’ve worked on once the 14 days lapse. In practice, PDF editors of this kind don’t delete or lock your output files — a redacted or annotated PDF you saved during the trial remains a normal PDF on your disk, openable in any reader. What you lose access to is the editor itself: once the trial ends, the application reverts to view-only or stops opening entirely unless you buy a license, so you cannot go back into that same file to make further edits, add more annotations, or run another redaction pass without paying. Treat the trial as a one-shot evaluation window for a specific batch of documents, not an ongoing free workflow.
Test 1: Redacting a mock participant-data PDF
Redaction is the task with the highest stakes in a research context — a participant’s name, date of birth, or contact details left visible in a “de-identified” dataset is not a cosmetic mistake, it’s a confidentiality breach. We ran a mock consent-form-style PDF containing fabricated names, emails, and ID numbers through the trial’s redaction tools.
Two redaction paths exist in the trial: manual redaction, where you draw a box over each item and the underlying text is permanently stripped (not just visually covered, which is the classic redaction failure mode — a black box over selectable text that a simple copy-paste or PDF-parsing script can still extract), and Smart Redact, which uses pattern/AI matching to find likely PII (names, emails, phone numbers, SSN-style numbers) across a document and queue them for one-pass redaction. Smart Redact is genuinely useful for catching scattered identifiers across a long document that a human reviewer might miss on a single pass, but it is not a substitute for a manual review pass on anything governed by an IRB protocol or a data-sharing agreement — automated PII detection has real false-negative rates on unusual name formats, non-US ID number patterns, and identifiers embedded in tables or footnotes, and a research team is accountable for the output either way. For a fuller picture of what “de-identified” actually requires beyond removing direct identifiers, see CASRAI’s de-identification entry. It’s also worth being precise about terminology: redacting a document is not the same action as a retraction, a term researchers sometimes conflate when discussing correcting the published record.
The redaction itself held up under a basic extraction test (selecting text in the redacted areas returned nothing, and searching the file for the removed strings returned no hits) — which is the baseline bar a redaction tool has to clear to be usable at all. Manual redaction in the trial is straightforward; Smart Redact requires reviewing its suggested matches before applying them, which is the correct default behavior for anything touching real participant data.
Test 2: Annotating a journal article
The second common task is markup: sticky notes, highlights, strikethroughs, and inline comments on a manuscript draft or a published article you’re critiquing for a journal club or peer review. This is the least differentiated part of the toolset — most PDF editors, including several free ones, handle basic annotation competently, and Foxit is no exception. Highlighting, comment threads, and drawing tools all worked as expected on a multi-column journal PDF layout without misplacing annotations relative to the underlying text, which is a real failure mode in weaker tools when a PDF uses a non-standard column structure.
Where Foxit’s trial goes further than a bare annotation tool is shared review: multiple reviewers’ comments can be consolidated into a single document with attribution, which is closer to what a co-author revision cycle or an editorial board actually needs than isolated single-user markup. Whether that’s worth paying for depends on whether your team already has a working process for this — a lab that already circulates tracked-changes Word drafts or uses journal-submission-system commenting may not need a dedicated PDF review layer at all.
Test 3: Combining supplementary files
Journal submission portals routinely ask for a single combined PDF of the main manuscript plus supplementary tables, figures, and appendices, sometimes with a specific page-order requirement. The trial’s merge tool handles this cleanly: drag files into an ordered list, reorder them, and export as one PDF, with page ranges preserved and bookmarks optionally auto-generated per source file. It also splits a combined PDF back into its component files, which is useful for the reverse case — pulling a single supplementary table out of a large combined submission PDF a co-author sent you.
This is a genuinely well-executed, if unglamorous, feature. It’s also one of the easiest to replicate with a free tool if that’s the only thing you need — several free/open-source PDF utilities merge and split files without any of the editing or redaction overhead, so don’t let this feature alone justify a paid license if merging is your only real requirement.
Try Foxit PDF Editor free for 14 days →
Are team or lab-wide licenses trial-able?
The free trial itself is a single-user, single-machine evaluation — there is no separate multi-seat or lab-wide trial license offered through the standard trial signup. If you’re evaluating this for a whole research team or a shared departmental license, the practical approach is to trial the individual desktop application yourself first to confirm the redaction/annotation/assembly workflow actually fits how your team works, then contact Foxit’s sales team directly for volume/business pricing and to ask about a multi-seat evaluation — vendors in this category will generally accommodate an extended or multi-seat pilot for an institutional buyer on request, even when it isn’t advertised as a self-serve option. Don’t assume a positive single-user trial automatically extrapolates to team pricing being worthwhile; get an actual quote before committing a lab or department budget.
Pricing after the trial, as of August 2026
Foxit’s current published pricing (verified against Foxit’s own site, subject to change and worth reconfirming before you buy):
- PDF Editor (subscription): starting around $10.99/month for the base editing tier.
- PDF Editor+ (subscription): around $159.99/year, and is the tier that includes Smart Redact, document management, and cloud features — the tier you’d want if AI-assisted redaction specifically is the reason you’re evaluating this tool.
- Perpetual license (Foxit PDF Editor, one-time purchase): around $209.99, which covers core editing, conversion, OCR, forms, document security, and fill-and-sign — but explicitly excludes the AI features, Smart Redact, and cloud/DMS features bundled with the subscription tiers.
If Smart Redact or shared-review workflows are the specific reason you’re evaluating this tool, the perpetual license will not get you there — that’s a subscription-only feature set. Confirm current pricing directly on Foxit’s site before purchasing, since vendor pricing changes without much notice.
Who this is not right for
Be honest with yourself about what you actually need before paying for a PDF editor subscription. If your only real task is merging a manuscript with supplementary files or adding basic highlights and comments, a free tool (or the annotation features already built into most reference managers) covers that without a subscription at all. If your institution already provides Adobe Acrobat Pro under a site license — common at larger universities — there’s little reason to add a second paid PDF tool on top of one you already have access to for free, even if Foxit’s redaction UI is arguably more direct. And if redaction on real participant or patient data is a recurring, high-stakes part of your workflow, don’t rely on any single desktop tool’s output as your compliance control — pair whichever editor you use with your institution’s actual de-identification review process and IRB/data-governance sign-off; the software validates that text is gone, not that your de-identification is legally or ethically sufficient.
Where Foxit clearly earns its place: teams that need AI-assisted redaction across large batches of documents, need multi-reviewer shared annotation in one file, and don’t already have a PDF tool covering that ground. For everyone else, the 14-day trial itself is the right next step — it costs nothing to confirm which category you’re in before you commit to a subscription.
Start your free Foxit PDF Editor trial →
Frequently asked questions
How long is the Foxit PDF Editor free trial?
14 days, with no credit card required to start it, as of August 2026. It installs the full desktop application rather than a limited demo.
What happens to redacted or annotated files after the trial ends?
The files themselves remain normal, openable PDFs on your computer — a redaction you made during the trial stays applied, since redaction permanently removes the underlying content rather than just hiding it. What you lose is the ability to open the editor to make further changes to those files (or any others) unless you purchase a license.
Does the free trial include Smart Redact?
Yes — the trial gives you the full toolset, including Smart Redact, which is otherwise bundled specifically with the paid PDF Editor+ subscription tier rather than the base tier or the perpetual license.
Can I trial a team or multi-user license instead of just one seat?
The standard self-serve trial is single-user. For a lab or department-wide evaluation, trial the desktop application individually first, then contact Foxit’s sales team for a business quote and to ask about an extended or multi-seat pilot.
Is Foxit PDF Editor’s redaction actually secure, or does it just hide text visually?
In our test, manually redacted and Smart-Redact-processed content was not recoverable via text selection or search on the exported file, which is the correct behavior — a proper redaction removes the underlying content object, unlike drawing an opaque box over visible text. Still verify this yourself on any document with real sensitive data before relying on it, and treat automated Smart Redact matches as suggestions requiring human review, not a final compliance step.
Is Foxit cheaper than Adobe Acrobat Pro?
Based on Foxit’s own published comparison, its PDF Editor+ annual subscription runs meaningfully below Adobe Acrobat Pro’s list annual price. Confirm both vendors’ current pricing directly before deciding, since figures on both sides change.
