The debate over equally as vs equally comes up constantly in edited prose, and the answer is cleaner than most people expect. "Equally as" is almost always redundant. You need one word or the other, not both. Understanding why takes about two minutes, and it'll sharpen every sentence you write afterward.
What does "equally" mean?
Equally is an adverb meaning "in the same degree" or "to the same extent." It modifies adjectives and other adverbs: equally important, equally fast, equally skilled. On its own, it already carries the idea of comparison. It doesn't need help.
"As" does something similar when used in a comparative structure. The phrase "as important as" sets up a direct comparison between two things. It pulls its own weight.
Putting "equally" and "as" together creates a sentence where both words are doing the same job. That's the problem.
Why "equally as" is redundant
Consider these three versions of the same sentence:
- "She is equally as talented as her sister."
- "She is equally talented as her sister."
- "She is as talented as her sister."
The first version doubles up. "Equally" and "as...as" both signal comparison, so only one is needed. The second version drops one "as" but still reads awkwardly. The third version is clean, direct, and the form most style guides prefer.
Dropping "as" and keeping "equally" also works in many cases: "The two candidates are equally qualified." No comparison target is named, and the sentence is tighter for it.
When writers reach for "equally as"
The phrase feels natural because both words appear constantly in English, often near each other. Writers hear sentences like "just as good" and mentally swap "just" for "equally," forgetting that "just as" is a fixed comparative unit rather than a swappable slot. "Equally as good" then feels like a reasonable paraphrase. It isn't.
There's also a rhythm problem. "Equally talented" can sound clipped to a writer who wants emphasis, so "equally as talented" gets added as a way to slow the sentence down. The intention is emphasis. The result is clutter.
This kind of doubling is similar to errors covered in hence why vs hence, where two words that individually signal the same logical function get stacked together out of habit rather than grammar.
How to fix "equally as" in your writing
The fix is always one of two moves:
Option 1: Drop "equally" and use "as...as." "She is equally as dedicated as her colleague" becomes "She is as dedicated as her colleague." Cleaner. No meaning lost.
Option 2: Drop "as" and keep "equally." "The two reports are equally as thorough" becomes "The two reports are equally thorough." This works best when you're not explicitly naming what the thing is being compared to.
Both fixes work. Pick the one that fits the rhythm of the surrounding sentence. Don't keep both words.
Is "equally as" ever acceptable?
Some descriptive grammarians argue that "equally as" has been used by reputable writers for centuries and shouldn't be called an error. That's technically true. You can find it in 19th-century prose. But "acceptable in historical texts" isn't the same as "recommended today." Every major contemporary style guide, including The Chicago Manual of Style, flags "equally as" as redundant and advises against it in formal writing.
In casual speech, nobody will notice. In a cover letter, an essay, or any piece of writing where precision counts, the redundancy stands out.
Quick examples: before and after
Here are five common sentences with "equally as," each revised:
- Before: "This method is equally as effective as the original." After: "This method is as effective as the original."
- Before: "Both options are equally as valid." After: "Both options are equally valid."
- Before: "The sequel was equally as disappointing." After: "The sequel was equally disappointing."
- Before: "She performs equally as well under pressure." After: "She performs just as well under pressure."
- Before: "The risk is equally as serious." After: "The risk is equally serious."
Related traps to watch for
Redundant comparatives are a surprisingly common category of error. If you've spotted "equally as" in your own writing, it's worth scanning for other doubled-up constructions too. Phrases like "more preferable" (preferable already means "more preferred"), "fewer in number" (fewer already refers to number), and "advance planning" (planning is inherently in advance) all follow the same pattern.
The habit of reaching for an intensifier when you want emphasis is natural. But intensifiers don't always add intensity. Sometimes they just add words. For a similar case where one word does the job better than two, see the discussion of around vs about, where choosing the right preposition depends on recognising which one already carries the meaning you need.
One clean word beats two competing ones. On the question of "equally as" vs "equally," that principle settles it.