Is Aihumanize.io worth your money, or does it leave AI-generated content still detectable? I tested this AI humanizer using GPTZero and ZeroGPT to find out if it can actually bypass AI detection while maintaining readable, grammatically correct output.
How I test: I generated three AI content samples using ChatGPT. I established baseline detection scores by running the original AI-generated texts through both GPTZero and ZeroGPT, then processed each sample using Aihumanize.io. I re-tested the humanized outputs through both detection platforms to measure effectiveness. I also manually evaluated the grammar quality and readability of all humanized text. You can find the raw test data for this review here.
| Pros | Cons |
|---|---|
| - Academic mode achieved 0% detection on both detectors for 2/3 tests | - Detection scores ranged from 0% to 100% on the same detector |
| - Multiple rewrite styles available (General, Academic, etc.) | - Poor writing quality with grammar errors and unnatural phrasing |
| - Users retain full copyright and ownership of content | - Free version limited to only 200 words |
| - Aggressive annual discounts (60% off Basic/Pro, 50% off Unlimited) | - Vague data retention policies |
| - Low per-request word limits (500-3,000 words max) | |
| - Aggressive text expansion (38%+) may not be desired |
How Well Did Aihumanize.io Perform?
I typically test AI humanizers with three writing samples: two at 205 words and one at 206 words. Unfortunately, this created an immediate problem with Aihumanize.io’s free version, which caps processing at exactly 200 words.
Interestingly, I discovered that the humanizer will still accept text exceeding this limit. It just truncates everything beyond 200 words and attempts to finish the incomplete sentence on its own. Still, I didn’t want the word cap to influence my evaluation, so I ran two additional tests using shortened versions of our samples that fit within the 200-word constraint. The first extra test used General mode, while the second tested the Academic writing style to see if specialized modes performed any differently.
In General mode (within the 200-word limit), I saw wildly different outcomes across three nearly identical test conditions. The first text achieved relatively good scores with GPTZero detecting only 11% AI content and ZeroGPT returning a perfect 0%. The second text flipped this pattern, with GPTZero detecting 0% but ZeroGPT flagging 26.09%. The third text was detected by GPTZero at 12% and flagged at 100% by ZeroGPT.
The over-limit tests (where I intentionally let the tool truncate our text) produced even more chaotic results. Text one performed reasonably on GPTZero (0%) but worse on ZeroGPT (37.22%) compared to the properly-sized version. Text two completely failed on GPTZero with a 100% AI detection score while achieving 0% on ZeroGPT. Text three showed 0% on GPTZero but 77.03% on ZeroGPT.
Keep in mind that the difference between the full and shortened texts was just 5-6 words, so it’s quite puzzling to see it have such a huge and unpredictable effect on AI detection tests.
The best overall performance was delivered by Academic mode. Two of our three tests achieved the holy grail of 0% detection on both GPTZero and ZeroGPT. However, the third text still registered 22% on GPTZero and 65.09% on ZeroGPT.
After analyzing the outputs more carefully, I immediately noticed a likely cause of Academic mode’s better detection scores. The Academic mode outputs averaged 277 words (286, 274, and 272 words respectively) from source texts of less than 200 words. That’s a 38% increase in length. General mode also expanded the text significantly. In one case, the output text was almost 150 words longer than the source, and the average across all three texts was 247 words (225, 320, and 198 words).
How Well Does Aihumanize.io Maintain Writing Quality?
Aihumanize.io’s detection rates weren’t terrible overall, but that’s only half the story. Bypassing AI detection only matters if the humanized text remains readable and grammatically sound. I evaluated the grammar quality and readability of all humanized outputs to determine if Aihumanize.io’s transformations preserve or damage the original writing quality.
General Mode
Writing Quality Score: 4/10
General mode’s writing quality was sometimes acceptable and sometimes not really. The most common issue was unnecessarily complicated phrasing that made simple concepts harder to understand.
The first text contained the awkward construction “it can adapt its method of delivering messages so that the user will feel comfortable with, and have a sense about, the AI’s responses.” The phrase “have a sense about” is unnatural English that no native speaker would use. The same text also included the redundant phrase “build empathy and user trust with users,” repeating “users” unnecessarily when “build empathy and trust with users” would suffice.
The second text made me question if Aihumanize.io understands the meaning of the text it’s editing because it contained the following non-sensical example: “(e.g., if you are driving your car and your tire blows out, you don’t have to wait five seconds for the system to analyze the situation).”
There was also the redundant phrasing in “By utilizing the automated capabilities of cybersecurity automation tools,” which uses “automated” and “automation” in the same phrase, and the third text repeated “ocean temperatures” twice in a single sentence: “coral reefs and other key ecosystems could sustain permanent damage due to changing ocean temperatures and acidification, as a result of rising ocean temperatures.”
Academic Mode
Writing Quality Score: 5/10
Academic mode showed small improvement over General mode but still produced MANY issues that would be unacceptable in actual academic writing.
The first text’s opening sentence demonstrates the core problem: “Artificial Intelligence Humanisation involves creating a system of Artificial Intelligence that is more organic, likable and simple for humans to use.” Using “Artificial Intelligence” twice in one sentence creates unnecessary repetition, and “likable and simple” sounds informal for academic writing. The same text later includes “does not sound robotic in the way in which it communicates,” which uses “in which” awkwardly when “as it communicates” would be clearer and more direct.
The second text contained a semicolon error (“Although this process does not replace the role of security personnel; rather, it provides an additional resource to them.”), and one grammatically awkward construction that would be easy to simplify (“as threats are being created at a rate quicker than the human resources to combat them can react”).
The third text opened with a missing “of” between “one” and “the” (“The Global Climate Change has become one the major global concerns”), and it continued with a wrong collocation when the verb “incur” was used instead of “sustain” or “suffer.”
How Much Does Aihumanize.io Cost?
Aihumanize.io offers three pricing tiers with substantial discounts for annual subscriptions:
| Plan | Monthly Price | Yearly Price | Words/Month | Words/Request | AI Detector Support |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Basic | $15 | $6 ($72/year) | 15,000 | 500 | None |
| Pro | $25 | $10 ($120/year) | 50,000 | 1,500 | 100 credits/month |
| Unlimited | $40 | $20 ($240/year) | Unlimited | 3,000 | 200 credits/month |
All plans include Autopilot Pro mode, history viewing, all rewrite styles (including Academic mode), and a “private rewriting model” that promises to be undetectable.
The Basic plan provides access to all rewrite styles and can process 15,000 words monthly, but it doesn’t support any AI detector integration. I don’t actually think this is a huge problem since you shouldn’t trust any humanizer to verify its own output.
The Pro and Unlimited plans include AI detector credits and much higher limits. Thanks to the aggressive annual discount, the Pro plan can provide a fairly good deal at just $10 per month with yearly billing. I would just like the per-request word limit to be higher since many competing humanizers can process many more words in one go than Aihumanize.io can (500 for Basic, 1,500 for Pro, 3,000 for Unlimited).
Does Aihumanize.io Respect User Privacy?
According to its privacy policy and terms of service, Aihumanize.io collects a fairly standard range of data for a web-based service:
-
Email address, name, and postal address
-
Browser type, IP address, and location data
-
User ID, username, and password
-
Payment information (credit card details, PayPal information)
-
Social media account information (if using social login)
-
Usage data (pages visited, time spent on pages, interaction patterns)
-
Cookies and tracking technologies
The good news is that Aihumanize.io explicitly states users retain “full copyright and ownership of any content they upload to the Services and any text humanization results generated by the Services.” In other words, the texts you humanize with the service remain yours, which is important for anyone concerned about intellectual property rights.
The bad news is that the privacy policy states Aihumanize.io “may receive information from public databases, marketing partners, social media platforms, and other outside sources.” This suggests data collection extends beyond what users directly provide, though the policy doesn’t specify what types of information come from these external sources or how they’re used.
I also don’t like that no specific information is given about data retention. The policy only states they keep information “for as long as necessary to fulfill the purposes outlined in this privacy notice, unless a longer retention period is required or permitted by law.” This doesn’t specify whether your humanized text is deleted immediately after processing, retained for days, months, or stored indefinitely.