Title Analyzer
Paste up to six title ideas and score each one against a published rubric — length, curiosity, power words and truncation — instead of going by gut feeling.
How it works
A title is a promise, and viewers judge it in a second, usually while scrolling past five others. This tool scores up to six title ideas against a single published rubric, so you compare them on the same criteria instead of whichever one felt good when you typed it. Nothing about the score is hidden: every point gained or lost is listed next to the title, with the reason in plain words, so a weak title becomes a fixable title rather than a rejected one.
The rubric starts with length. Titles land best between 30 and 60 characters: long enough to promise something specific, short enough to survive truncation. Next comes the number — a count or a year sets a concrete expectation and stands out in a feed of words. Curiosity is measured by whether the title opens a loop the video closes: question words, secrets and things nobody tells you all count, because a viewer who needs the answer has to click. Power words are the specific, emotional words that earn attention, while structure rewards a bracket, colon or dash that splits the title into a hook plus a payoff. Front-loading matters because feeds truncate from the right, so the strongest bait must sit in the first three words. Word count, capitalisation and emoji use are scored too, and filler words like "stuff" and "things" lose points because they promise nothing.
The most useful output is not the score itself but the truncation preview. Every title is shown exactly as it appears in a desktop feed (about 55 characters) and on mobile (about 40), because a title that reads perfectly on a monitor can lose its ending — often the payoff — on a phone. When you enter more than one title, the strongest of the set is flagged, and each card has a button that sends the title straight into the Thumbnail Tester, so you can judge title and image together the way viewers see them. That pairing is the point: the thumbnail shows, the title teases, and a title that repeats the thumbnail word for word wastes one of the two.
Treat the score as a checklist, not a promise. A title can score well and still belong to a weak video, and a brilliant video can survive a mediocre title. The one trap the rubric cannot save you from is a title that promises something the video does not deliver: it wins one click and costs the channel's next hundred, because viewers who feel tricked do not come back. No account or channel connection is involved; titles you type never leave your browser.
Frequently asked questions
What is a good title score?
70 or above is strong, 45 to 69 is workable with fixes, and below 45 usually means the title is too long, too vague or missing a hook. The breakdown next to each score says exactly what to change.
Why does truncation matter so much?
Feeds cut titles from the right. On mobile only about 40 characters show, so a title whose payoff sits at the end loses it on the device most viewers use.
Does the analyzer connect to my YouTube channel?
No. It scores whatever you paste, with no login and no connection to your account. Nothing you type is sent anywhere.
Can it write titles for me?
No, and that is deliberate. It scores and diagnoses your ideas; the idea itself, and the judgement about whether the video delivers on it, stays yours.