We put five leading AI video editors to the test. Same video. Recorded at the same time. Paid plans. The goal was simple: remove dead air, filler words, and bad takes automatically.
This comprehensive data analysis compares TimeBolt against Descript, Gling, Premiere Pro, CapCut, and Loom automatically editing in both scripted and unscripted scenarios. Full test methodology, raw files, and JSON data are available in the linked studies for independent verification.
than nearest competitor (Gling)
Competitors consistently miss ~700+ cuts (silence & fillers), creating a massive manual repair burden.
TimeBolt found 6x more removeable waste than Loom, ensuring a tighter, more engaging final video.
Instant Publish-Ready Baseline
While TimeBolt required zero cleanup, Descript and Gling demanded 4–10 minutes of manual fixing for a single 90s clip.
Premiere Pro and CapCut left behind 200% more waste (23s–27s of junk) compared to TimeBolt's precision cut.
Highest Precision & Recall Balance
Descript left 97% more redundant content (junk words) than TimeBolt, directly increasing manual editing workload.
Only TimeBolt, Gling, and Descript offer this capability. Standard editors like Premiere, CapCut, and Loom cannot detect bad takes.
These tests were conducted by TimeBolt using identical source files across all platforms.
Per Minute of Video
| TIMEBOLT | LOOM | PREMIERE | CAPCUT | GLING | DESCRIPT | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Filler Removal Accuracy |
100% ✅ | 35% | 74% | 76% | 82% | 83% |
| Bad Takes Accuracy |
91% ✅ | Can't Do | Can't Do | Can't Do | 85% | 80% |
| Time to Fix | 15 sec ✅ | Can't Fix | 1.7 min | 1.9 min | 7 min | 3 min |
*CapCut's lower fix time despite weaker accuracy is driven by 2x faster review & repair via visual waveform vs transcript-locked workflow.
*Gling requires ~35% more manual fixes than Descript (677 vs. 500) due to 36% more missed fillers—each a separate click—despite catching more silence. Filler fixes dominate time; silence is bulk-trimmable.
One raw script recorded on camera-only in TimeBolt, Descript, and Loom.
Script deliberately included long pauses, ums, uhs, and filler.
Tested on top-tier paid plans of TimeBolt, Descript, and Loom.
Only automation features used: dead-air removal and filler-word removal.
No manual edits.
This was a controlled experiment designed to stress-test each platform for accuracy of cuts.
AI editors like Descript and Loom convert speech into tokens (tiny text chunks). Long silences stretch token timing, while fillers like um and uh create low-confidence tokens that often slip out of sync. When the software tries to cut based on this text, words get clipped or gaps are left behind.
TimeBolt avoids this problem by cutting on the waveform itself. Silence is a flat line, fillers are short spikes. That’s why our cuts are precise, while transcript editors choke.
See what happened when YouTuber Excelerator solved the problem of bad data in Descript.
Waveforms are a physical signal. Like GPS nothing is more accurate.
TimeBolt doesn’t care about tokens, it looks directly at the audio waveform.
That means no drift, no low-confidence guesses, no fragmented removal logic.
When Umcheck adds token-awareness on top, it’s optional and controlled on-device: you can catch 'you know' or 'oh shit,' but the waveform still dictates cut boundaries.
Performance metrics from the Short-Form Analysis (90-Second Raw Clip).
TimeBolt vs Gling vs Descript vs Premiere vs CapCut vs Loom.
Minutes spent fixing the AI's mistakes on a 90s clip.
*Premiere & CapCut values extrapolated based on Descript baseline + timeline editing friction.
Excess seconds of junk (Silence/Filler) missed.
*Loom leaves 41s of dead air/fillers.
Comparison of final output length (Lower is Better).
*TimeBolt created the tightest cut (14s).
Consolidated metrics from Short-Form (90s) Test.
Performance metrics from the Long-Form Analysis (1hr Raw Footage).
TimeBolt vs Gling vs Descript vs Premiere vs CapCut vs Loom.
Total minutes spent getting to a "Publish-Ready" state.
* Why is Gling so high? Gling’s higher fix time (220.7 min vs. Descript’s 99.9 min) stems from missing more fillers (607 vs. 448) despite fewer silence misses (70s vs. 171s), which are easier bulk trims. Gling’s aggressive cuts also introduce false positives, inflating repair by 3x (174 min vs. 52 min) via extra inspections.
Count of "Junk" edits the AI failed to catch.
*Competitors leave ~700+ edits behind.
Minutes of Junk (Silence + Fillers) found in 1hr file.
*TimeBolt catches ~6x more waste than Loom.
Consolidated findings. Copy this for your email body.
Performance metrics for Scripted Video "Bad Take" Removal.
TimeBolt vs Gling vs Descript.
Combines Precision (Safety) and Recall (Cleanliness).
How effectively does it remove bad takes? (Higher is better)
Average metrics from real 60-minute test footage scenarios.
Get started today before this once in a lifetime opportunity expires.
