GMAT 695 — Q88, near-perfect Quant — with e-GMAT

Strengths:

If you're asking whether e-GMAT is worth it, my answer is yes — and I'm an engineer who came in expecting Quant to be easy, so I didn't think I needed much help. It turned out I did, and the course gave me exactly the right kind. I finished with a near-perfect Q88 and a 695 overall. The first thing worth knowing is how little time it wastes: you give the Personalized Study Plan your real schedule — I work full-time — and it hands you the day's work, so you're never sitting there deciding what to study. Small thing, big difference over a few months. As an engineer I assumed my fundamentals would carry me; what the course quietly proved was that knowing the math and scoring under a clock are two different skills, and it was built to close exactly that gap.

Would make the product better:

What sold me were the practice questions and the analytics behind them. The practice lives in two banks, Scholaranium and Neuron, and the questions are close enough to the real exam that nothing on test day felt unfamiliar — people underrate how much that matters. Neuron carries the actual Official Guide questions, just with e-GMAT's own solutions — more detailed and smoother than the official ones — so you're not buying the Official Guide separately, a real saving when you tally up what GMAT prep usually costs in bits and pieces. And the analytics are honest to a fault: a feature called PRISM tells you, for each question, not only whether you missed it but the reason, and flags when you simply took too long. That's what breaks a plateau, because it points you at the actual problem instead of letting you grind blindly. The proof: on the toughest Word Problems my accuracy climbed from the high-70s to 93%, and I got faster while doing it. One tip if you use it: read the full solution even on questions you got right — half my speed gains came from finding a cleaner method I'd otherwise have missed.

Where it really earned its money was the section I was worst at. In Critical Reasoning I had no method at all — I was basically guessing — and the lessons rebuilt it from scratch until I could see why an answer was right and the others were traps; my hard accuracy there went from a coin-flip to the low-70s, and Data Insights followed the same path once I stopped avoiding it. The one honest caveat: the mocks are demanding, calibrated a notch harder than the real exam, so your early scores can land low. That's a feature, not a flaw — once you're used to that level, test day feels comfortable. So, would I recommend it? To basically anyone. If you're starting from scratch it builds the method for you step by step; if you already have decent fundamentals but you're stuck, grinding away without your score moving, it shows you what's actually wrong and fixes it. I was in the second camp, and it still taught me things I thought I already knew. Whatever level you're at, it meets you there — and it works.