MarkItDown vs Docling vs Marker vs Pandoc: an honest comparison

7 August 2026 · Milldown team · All posts

Four open-source projects dominate document-to-Markdown conversion, and they are genuinely different tools built for different jobs. Full disclosure up front: Milldown is built on MarkItDown, so we have a horse in this race — which is exactly why this comparison names the cases where the others win.

The one-table answer

EngineMade byBuilt forReads PDF?Standout strengthMain weakness
MarkItDownMicrosoftLLM ingestion, breadthYesWidest format support (Office, PDF, EPUB, HTML, images); fast; simple Python APILighter layout analysis on complex PDFs
DoclingIBM ResearchLayout-heavy PDFsYesVision-model layout analysis: multi-column, dense tables, reading orderSlower and heavier; narrower format range
MarkerCommunity (Datalab)Academic PDFsYesExcellent on papers — equations, references, figuresPDF-centric; benefits from a GPU
PandocCommunityPublishing, any-to-anyNo (output only)Superb DOCX→Markdown; converts out of Markdown to anythingCannot read PDFs at all; no LLM-oriented features

MarkItDown: the generalist

Microsoft’s MarkItDown converts more formats than the other three combined — Word, Excel, PowerPoint, PDF, HTML, EPUB, images, and more — into Markdown specifically shaped for LLM consumption. It’s a small Python library with no model downloads and no GPU requirement, which makes it fast and easy to embed. The trade-off: it reads a PDF’s text layer rather than analysing its visual layout, so a gnarly multi-column report with nested tables will come out less faithfully than from Docling or Marker.

Docling: when layout is the hard part

IBM’s Docling runs vision transformer models over each page to detect columns, tables, figures, and reading order. On scientific papers and financial reports with dense tables it produces measurably better structure — independent benchmarks put it ahead of MarkItDown on extraction fidelity. The cost is speed and footprint: model inference per page versus text extraction. If your corpus is layout-heavy and accuracy is worth minutes, Docling earns its keep.

Marker: the academic specialist

Marker focuses on doing one thing extremely well: research PDFs. Equations, citations, and figure handling are its home turf, and with a GPU it’s quick. If you’re converting arXiv papers all day, start here. For mixed office documents, it’s the wrong shape.

Pandoc: the publisher (and the trap)

Pandoc is the finest universal document converter ever written, and its DOCX-to-Markdown output is arguably the best there is. But the number-one misconception in this space: Pandoc cannot read PDFs. PDF is an output format for Pandoc (via LaTeX), not an input. It also has no notion of token efficiency, OCR, or LLM-oriented cleanup — it’s a publishing tool from a different era, and a brilliant one. We wrote a fuller comparison in Milldown vs pandoc.

Which should you pick?

These are libraries, though — all four assume a terminal and a Python or Haskell toolchain. If you want the MarkItDown engine with none of the setup, that’s the product we build: Milldown wraps the full engine in a native Mac app and adds what the library doesn’t have — on-device OCR for scanned PDFs, a live token counter, boilerplate cleanup, and batch watch folders. Everything runs locally.

The MarkItDown engine, zero setup

Drag, drop, done — the full conversion engine in a native Mac app, running entirely on your machine. Free for 14 days.

Get Milldown for macOS

macOS 14+ · Apple Silicon · $39 one-time after trial (excl. VAT) · no subscription