Is Hindawi Predatory? A Practical Publisher Verdict
Hindawi was not predatory by standard definitions during its independent years, but after Wiley's acquisition, systematic fraud led to 11,300+ retractions and the brand's complete shutdown by 2024.
Next step
Choose the next useful decision step first.
Use the guide or checklist that matches this page's intent before you ask for a manuscript-level diagnostic.
Quick answer: Hindawi is essentially defunct. The brand no longer exists. Wiley acquired it for $298 million in 2021, discovered industrial-scale peer review fraud, retracted over 11,300 papers, and shut the brand down entirely by 2024. The question is no longer whether Hindawi is predatory but what happened and what it means for researchers who published there.
Why people ask the question
Hindawi triggers this question because of a specific sequence of events:
- It appeared on Beall's list as a borderline case before the Wiley acquisition
- After Wiley's 2021 acquisition, organized fraud rings exploited the special issue system at industrial scale
- Between 2023 and 2025, Wiley retracted over 11,300 papers across journals, the largest mass retraction in publishing history
- Wiley wrote down $104 million and took an additional $44 million impairment charge
- The Hindawi brand was retired entirely in 2024
These facts make the question understandable, even though the answer requires distinguishing between different eras of the publisher.
What is actually true about Hindawi
Independent Hindawi (1997-2021) was not predatory by standard definitions. Founded in Cairo by Ahmed Hindawi, it became one of the earliest pure open-access publishers, converting its full portfolio to gold OA by 2007. Its journals were indexed in Scopus, Web of Science, and PubMed. It was DOAJ-listed and COPE-compliant. APCs were typically $1,000-$1,500.
It was a mid-tier publisher with a functional, if sometimes uneven, peer review system. Not prestigious, but not a scam.
Hindawi timeline and evidence
Year | Event | Impact |
|---|---|---|
1997 | Hindawi founded in Cairo | Mid-tier OA publisher, DOAJ-listed, COPE-compliant |
2007 | Full portfolio converted to gold OA | One of earliest pure OA publishers |
2014 | Added to Beall's list as borderline | Reputation questions began |
2021 | Wiley acquires Hindawi for $298M | Special issue vulnerability inherited |
2022-23 | Paper mills exploit guest editor system | Fake reviewers, manufactured manuscripts at scale |
2023 | First wave of retractions (~500) | Escalated to thousands by late 2023 |
2024 | Wiley retires Hindawi brand entirely | Journals absorbed into Wiley Open Access |
2025 | Total retractions exceed 11,300 | Largest mass retraction event in publishing history |
Financial | Wiley losses: $104M write-down + $44M impairment | Plus ~$30-50M/year in lost APC revenue |
Where the real risk sits
The catastrophe was not about fake publishing. It was about inadequate safeguards meeting organized fraud at scale.
The specific vulnerability was special issues. Guest editors controlled too much of the editorial process: suggesting reviewers, managing timelines, and approving papers with minimal oversight from editors-in-chief. Paper mills exploited this by placing compromised guest editors who funneled manufactured manuscripts through fake reviewer accounts.
After acquiring Hindawi, Wiley did not immediately integrate its integrity screening tools. The Hindawi submission system continued operating semi-independently. Volume incentives, since more articles meant more APC revenue, created institutional reluctance to slow the pipeline. The result was that entire special issues were found where every paper, every reviewer, and the guest editor were all connected to the same fraud operation.
The retractions came in waves: roughly 500 in early 2023, escalating to thousands by late 2023, with cleanup continuing into 2025. Wiley detected paper mill indicators on 10-13% of all Hindawi papers, meaning roughly one in eight to ten published articles showed signs of fraud. The scale was unprecedented: more papers were retracted from Hindawi in 2023 alone than had ever been retracted from all publishers combined in any previous year.
The Wiley CEO who initiated the Hindawi acquisition stepped down in the aftermath.
Why the answer has to be era by era
The Hindawi question has no single answer because the publisher passed through distinct phases:
- Pre-acquisition (1997-2021): Legitimate mid-tier OA publisher with real but thin editorial infrastructure
- Wiley-Hindawi (2021-2023): Acquired publisher whose vulnerabilities were scaled rather than fixed
- Crisis and shutdown (2023-2024): Mass retractions, brand retirement, journals absorbed into Wiley OA
A paper published in a Hindawi journal in 2015 is a different proposition from one published in a compromised special issue in 2022. Evaluators should check era, journal, and whether the specific paper was part of a retracted special issue.
The better question than "is Hindawi predatory?"
Since the brand is defunct, the practical questions are now:
If you published in a Hindawi journal, is your paper safe? If you are evaluating Hindawi-era work, how much scrutiny does it need?
That means checking:
- whether the specific paper carries a retraction notice in PubMed or Retraction Watch
- whether it appeared in a special issue, and if so, whether other papers in that issue were retracted
- when it was published, since papers from 2022-2023 deserve more scrutiny than those from 2015
- whether the former Hindawi journal now publishes under the Wiley name with improved oversight
Practical verdict
Hindawi as a brand no longer exists. Independent Hindawi was a real publisher with real, if limited, editorial infrastructure. The Wiley acquisition exposed how easily that infrastructure could be exploited at scale, producing the largest mass retraction event in publishing history.
For researchers with existing Hindawi publications that were not retracted, the papers remain in the scholarly record with their original indexing. For anyone evaluating Hindawi-era work, the key factors are publication date, whether it was a special issue, and whether retraction notices are present.
Surviving journals now publish under the Wiley name with new integrity measures including automated fraud detection and stricter guest editor vetting. If you are considering submitting to a former Hindawi journal, check its post-2024 editorial standards and compare it to alternatives.
If you want help identifying the right journal for your paper, manuscript readiness check can match your work to venues without unresolved integrity concerns.
Related assessments: Is MDPI predatory? and Is Frontiers predatory?.
Readiness check
Run the scan while the topic is in front of you.
See score, top issues, and journal-fit signals before you submit.
Before you submit
A manuscript readiness check identifies the specific issues that trigger desk rejection before you submit.
Frequently asked questions
Hindawi was not predatory by standard definitions during its independent years (1997-2021). It was DOAJ-listed, COPE-compliant, and indexed in Scopus and Web of Science. After Wiley acquired it in 2021, systematic peer review manipulation led to 11,300+ retractions. Wiley shut down the Hindawi brand entirely in 2024.
Organized paper mills compromised the peer review process across dozens of Hindawi special issues. Fake reviewer accounts, manipulated guest editors, and manufactured manuscripts led to 11,300+ retractions across journals between 2023 and 2025.
No. Wiley retired the Hindawi brand in 2024 and folded surviving journals into its Wiley Open Access portfolio. The hindawi.com domain redirects to Wiley's open access page.
Non-retracted papers remain in the scholarly record and retain their indexing. Retracted papers carry retraction notices in PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science. Researchers who published legitimate work do not need to take action, but citing Hindawi-era papers may invite scrutiny.
Wiley paid $298 million for Hindawi, then took a $104 million write-down plus a $44 million impairment charge. Lost APC revenue from paused journals added an estimated $30-50 million annually. Total estimated losses exceed $178 million.
Sources
- 1. Wiley has retracted more than 11,300 papers, Science.
- 2. Wiley to shutter Hindawi brand, Nature.
- 3. Retraction Watch leaderboard, Retraction Watch.
- 4. What happened at Hindawi, Scholarly Kitchen.
- 5. COPE best practice guidelines, COPE.
- 6. Wiley investor relations, Wiley FY2024 disclosures.
Before you upload
Choose the next useful decision step first.
Move from this article into the next decision-support step. The scan works best once the journal and submission plan are clearer.
Use the scan once the manuscript and target journal are concrete enough to evaluate.
Anthropic Privacy Partner. Zero-retention manuscript processing.
Where to go next
Supporting reads
Conversion step
Choose the next useful decision step first.
Use the scan once the manuscript and target journal are concrete enough to evaluate.