Gestic vs Moxfield
These two are not really competing. Moxfield builds decks; Gestic tracks the cards you physically own. This page is about what changes if you add the second one — with our numbers stated plainly and dated, and what you should check for yourself.
What we can prove about ourselves
Every figure below is served live from our own statistics endpoint, so it is the same number our home page shows and it moves as the data does. Measured 2026-07-06, sample of 100,089 scans:
| Scan accuracy, card identified | 99.7% |
|---|---|
| Scan accuracy, exact printing identified | 98.4% |
| Scans run through it | 335,921 since 2025-02-06 |
| Cards tracked | 2,108,016 |
| Cost to scan | Free, no cap |
| Export formats | 9 — Arena, Cardmarket, ManaBox, ManaPool, Moxfield, SpellWeave, TCGplayer, TCGTracking, custom fields |
We publish the printing-level number as well as the card-level one because they are not the same problem. Reading “Lightning Bolt” off a card is easy; deciding which of its forty-four printings you are holding is the hard part, and it is the one that decides whether your collection is worth what your spreadsheet says. We are less accurate at that — 98.4% against 99.7% — and we would rather say so than quote one number.
Will my Moxfield lists come with me?
Yes, and you can send them back. Moxfield is one of our eight export formats, so this is a two-way door rather than a one-way import.
Deck lists import directly. Tested on a real Moxfield export: 75 lines, 100 cards once quantities are counted, nothing rejected, and every set code and collector number landed on the printing the file named. Foil and etched markers come across too.
Export with set codes, not without. Moxfield can also give you a plain list of card names with no set — the MTGO-style export. Both import, and neither loses a card. But a name on its own does not say which printing you own, so we have to choose one for you, and we will often choose differently from what is in your box. We measured it on the same deck exported both ways: with set codes, every card matched; without them, 56 of the 75 landed on a different printing, some of them on promos and Secret Lair versions worth many times the card you actually have.
Nothing is lost either way — every card arrives — but if you care what your collection is worth, take the export that carries the set code. That is true of any tool reading that file, not just this one.
What a deck list cannot bring is condition and language, because the format does not carry them — it is a list of cards, not of copies. Those cards arrive as Near Mint in the printing's own language, and you set them afterwards. We would rather say that plainly than let you find it later: nothing is lost that was in the file, but nothing is invented either.
A collection export is the shape that carries grades, and those come across: Near Mint, lightly, moderately and heavily played each land as the grade in the file, and cards arrive under their own printed names rather than as English placeholders.
Where we are genuinely different
The cards exist physically. That is the whole difference. A deck builder works from a list you type; Gestic works from a stack you scan. If you already know what you own and only want to build with it, you do not need us.
A document scanner, not just a phone. Gestic drives sheet-fed ADF scanners, so a few thousand cards is a stack you feed rather than a thousand photographs you take. For a long box that is the whole difference.
Sorting by where the card physically is. Scan a card into a location and the app remembers the location, so “which box is my second Ragavan in” has an answer.
Your decks get public pages. A list you mark visible gets its own indexable page, and a play-tester anyone can open without an account.
Every privacy control is free. Publishing or unpublishing a page, hiding a section, keeping a list private — free on every plan, forever. Privacy is never a paid feature here.
What we are not claiming
We are not claiming to replace Moxfield. It is a deck builder, it is very good at it, and building decks is not what this is for. Plenty of people will sensibly use both — which is exactly why we read its formats and write them back.
This page deliberately does not carry a feature-by-feature table. Their feature set is theirs to change, and a comparison table written once and left to rot is worse than no table: it misleads the reader and embarrasses us. If you want to know what Moxfield does today, read their own pages.
What we will stand behind are the numbers at the top, because they come from our own measurements and carry the date and sample size to check them by.
Questions people ask before adding a second tool
Can I import my Moxfield decks?
Yes. A real export of 75 lines and 100 cards imported with nothing
rejected — quantities, sets, collector numbers, foil and etched.
Which Moxfield export should I use?
The one with set codes. The plain name-only list imports too, but we have
to guess the printing, and on the same deck we guessed differently for 56
of 75 cards.
Will conditions come across?
From a collection export, yes. From a deck list, no, because a deck list
does not record them.
Does this replace Moxfield?
No. It covers the part Moxfield is not for: the physical cards.
Can I scan instead of typing?
Yes, with a phone or a sheet-fed document scanner, free and uncapped.
Can it tell me which box a card is in?
Yes. That is one of the main reasons people use it.
Can I get my collection back out?
Yes, in eight formats including Moxfield's own.
Compare with something else
If you are weighing Gestic against a different tool, these are the others we have written up — same rules, same measured numbers:
- Gestic vs ManaBox — a phone scanner with a big user base
- Gestic vs EchoMTG — collection value tracking
- Gestic vs Delver Lens — the Android scanning app
Try it on one box
Scanning is free and uncapped, so the honest way to judge it is to scan a single box and see whether it identified the printings correctly. That is the test that matters, and it costs you nothing here.