Hello everyone, I am Youna. At work, we inevitably have to convert various document formats in our day-to-day tasks. We will explore a few mainstream PDF to Word SDKs, analyzing their advantages and disadvantages in our actual work.
1. Solid: An old and trusted PDF to Office conversion library with decades of experience.
2. Aspose: It supports a wide range of file format conversions, including PDF to Word.
3. Foxit: A recently launched self-developed PDF and PDF to Office product.
4. ComPDFKit: It is a new and ambitious company, which frequently updates its products. Their PDF apps are downloaded by over 200 million.
Let's directly compare the PDF to Word conversion capabilities of these SDKs.
Comparison Table
I tested some documents with different features, which include those with many pages, those incorporating tables, and those combining text and graphics. Also, I chose some documents in different industries like academic papers, CAD drafting, finance, and others. Let's first take a look at how long the conversion times are when converted by different PDF Conversion SDK technologies.
Out of 12 documents, Foxit failed to convert three documents, while the other three SDKs successfully converted all documents. Aspose SDK can only convert the first four pages due to trial reasons, but in some cases, it is still slower than the other three that converted all pages. ComPDFKit has the fastest conversion speed overall. Next, let's take a look at the specific effects.
Convert A PDF with 651 Pages
Original Document:
Conversion Results of SDK Vendors:
- ComPDFKit: Basically no problem, however, the font is different from the original document.
- Foxit: You can see that there are some minor recognition errors, mainly when crossing lines. There are some cases of bold recognition errors.
- Solid: Basically no problem, no errors. However, there is also a font difference.
Convert A Securities PDF Document with Graphics and Chinese
Original Document:
Conversion Results of SDK Vendors:
- ComPDFKit: The layouts are correct. However, some fonts on the second page will have a ghosting phenomenon, and some text will exceed the text box.
- Foxit: The layouts are correct. However, some fonts on the second page will have a ghosting phenomenon, and the chart on the first page will exceed the text box.
- Solid: The layouts are correct. However, the chart on the first page will exceed the text box, and the footer image on the first page has a transparency recognition error.
- Aspose: The layouts are correct. However, some text on the second page has a shadow.
Convert A Thesis PDF File
Original Document:
Conversion Results of SDK Vendors:
- ComPDFKit: The conversion of formula is converted to the original characters in the document, so there will be garbled characters.
- Foxit: It did not distinguish between the boldness of the small title and the thinness of the text, and some text was replaced by pictures, making the layout relatively messy.
- Solid: It supports the formula better, but some symbols use deformed pictures instead, which affects the visual effect.
Convert A PDF with Text and Graphics
Original Document:
Conversion Results of SDK Vendors:
The mixed text and graphics layout is well maintained by all these SDKs. ComPDFKit, Foxit, Solid fonts, and original documents are not solved perfectly. Aspose is the closest, but Aspose background image scaling is wrong. ComPDFkit has a few words at the top cut-off.
- ComPDFKit:
- Foxit:
- Solid：
- Aspose:
Convert A PDF with Text, Images, and Tables
- Foxit: The background shape of the text is changed, becoming irregular.
- Aspose: Background image shrunk.
- ComPDFKit: Some text presenting time was cut off in part.
- Solid: The effect is good.
Original Document:
Conversion Results of SDK Vendors:
- ComPDFKit:
- Foxit：
- Solid：
- Aspose:
Conclusion
These SDKs converted PDF to Word have their own advantages and disadvantages. It should be the different algorithm focus when converting PDF to Word. You can choose the appropriate SDK company according to your own project situation and project budget.