Every figure here carries the date it was read and the source it came from. How scoring works →
AI Humanizers: What a Rewrite Costs, What the Terms Let You Keep, and Which Vendors Also Sell a Detector
3 tools measured · Vouch Score data collected 18 September 2026 · highest composite first
An AI humanizer rewrites text so it reads the way a person writes: sentence lengths that vary, fewer stock phrases, less of the evenness a language model leaves behind. Buyers arrive with two different jobs. One is editing, where the ideas and the draft are yours and it simply reads stiff. The other is getting text past a checker. This page does not measure or advise on that second job, and nothing here reports whether any rewrite passes any detector, because that would be a test this desk has not run.
Say plainly, then, what the page cannot score. The row a buyer most wants filled, how good the rewrite is, carries no independent figure here. There is no blind-vote arena for rewriting, and no independent study of current rewriting was found when the cards here were read. Vendors publish plenty of percentages about their own output; they appear on a card only as dated claims with the seller named, and they never enter a score. The capability position publishes a named criterion instead, under its own name: what the paid tier lets you take away.
What can be measured is what the plans cost and in what unit, what the vendor's own terms say about the text you paste and the text you get back, and what users report wherever a record can be attributed to the product. One more thing belongs at the top: some companies in this market sell the detector as well as the rewriter, sometimes on the same domain, and a card says so with the date it was checked.
Top score: HumanizeMyAI. It holds the highest Vouch Score composite on this page, 75.1/100, measured 11 September 2026. The label is computed from the cards, not chosen by us, and it moves the day another tool measures higher. Read what each card measured before you take it as advice for your own work.
1HumanizeMyAItop score · highest composite75.1/100 · average
An English-only rewriter for AI-assisted drafts that the vendor says draws on a corpus of 2,590 permissioned essays; four free rewrites of up to 250 words, once, then paid plans priced by run count and a word cap per run.
HumanizeMyAI, at humanizemy.ai, is an English-only rewriter sold by Mihci AI Studios LLC; humanizemyai.com is a different product. The vendor's own documents state the free allowance three incompatible ways. HumanizeMyAI scores 75.1, average band, rescored 15 September 2026, and no cell rests on an independent measurement: two rows are renamed criteria, two are read off the vendor's own documents. No review platform this page could read holds one review of it.
Visit HumanizeMyAI ↗Read the full review →Free account: 4 rewrites of up to 250 words, once, no card · Basic $18 billed monthly or $144 a year · Pro $27 or $216 · Ultra $48 or $432 · word-metered API from $59 a month. Read 2026-09-11.
Rewriting short pieces one at a time on a fixed monthly request quota
Rewrites AI-written text so it reads as a person's, metered by request rather than by word, with a detector, a Chrome side panel and a word-billed API sold beside it.
WriteHuman rewrites AI-generated text to read as a person wrote it, sold by Write Human, LLC. The free tier allows three requests a month at 250 words each; paid plans run $20 to $59 monthly or $12 to $39 billed yearly, both read 18 September 2026. WriteHuman scores 73.6, average band: capability is published as a delivery envelope, not a rewrite-quality measurement, because this desk ran no test. Three consumer platforms describe three different populations, held open rather than averaged.
Visit WriteHuman ↗Read the full review →Free tier: 3 humanizer requests a month at 250 words each, with the vendor's own comparison table labelling free output quality 'Basic' against 'Enhanced' on every paid tier. Paid tiers read $20, $29 and $59 a month in the monthly view and $12, $19 and $39 a month in the yearly view, which is the state the page loads in. Both views read on 2026-09-18. The API is billed separately by word, from an 'Included words / month' allowance, and is not part of these plans.
Rewriting AI-drafted English text inside a suite a writer already uses
Rewrites AI-written text so it reads as a person's, inside QuillBot's wider writing suite. The vendor sells an AI detector on the same domain and the humanizer page links to it.
QuillBot's AI Humanizer is one tool inside the QuillBot writing suite, sold by Learneo, Inc.
Free humanizing stops at 125 words a run and six runs a day, and a free account is licensed for
personal, non-commercial use only. Premium lists at $19.95 monthly in the vendor's own price
data, and two Turkey renders four days apart held different plan tables. Composite 73.4, average band,
rescored 14 September 2026. Every study found of QuillBot measures its paraphraser, not this.
Visit QuillBot ↗Read the full review →Free tier humanizes up to 125 words a run, 6 runs a day; Premium $19.95 a month or $99.95 a year in the vendor's default US table (Internet Archive copies, 2026-08-10 and 2026-08-31). THE SAME PAGE SERVES OTHER TABLES TO OTHER VISITS: archived variants at $21.95, $23.95 and $24.95, one US-served copy displaying $12.50 a month billed annually while its own data array said $8.33, and a Turkey-served render that on 11 September 2026 held no monthly plan at all, only Annual 49.95, Semi-Annual 39.95 and Quarterly 19.95, with a Monthly 9.95 present in the same table four days later. App Store in-app prices differ again and are never mixed in.
Outbound links may be affiliate links and can earn us a commission: they never touch a score, and the order on this page is the composite order, computed at build time from the cards themselves.
The score cards in full
What each card measured and what it did not: every number dated, sourced and reproducible.
An English-only rewriter for AI-assisted drafts that the vendor says draws on a corpus of 2,590 permissioned essays; four free rewrites of up to 250 words, once, then paid plans priced by run count and a word cap per run.
Free account: 4 rewrites of up to 250 words, once, no card · Basic $18 billed monthly or $144 a year · Pro $27 or $216 · Ultra $48 or $432 · word-metered API from $59 a month. Read 2026-09-11.
Rewrites AI-written text so it reads as a person's, metered by request rather than by word, with a detector, a Chrome side panel and a word-billed API sold beside it.
Free tier: 3 humanizer requests a month at 250 words each, with the vendor's own comparison table labelling free output quality 'Basic' against 'Enhanced' on every paid tier. Paid tiers read $20, $29 and $59 a month in the monthly view and $12, $19 and $39 a month in the yearly view, which is the state the page loads in. Both views read on 2026-09-18. The API is billed separately by word, from an 'Included words / month' allowance, and is not part of these plans.
Rewrites AI-written text so it reads as a person's, inside QuillBot's wider writing suite. The vendor sells an AI detector on the same domain and the humanizer page links to it.
Free tier humanizes up to 125 words a run, 6 runs a day; Premium $19.95 a month or $99.95 a year in the vendor's default US table (Internet Archive copies, 2026-08-10 and 2026-08-31). THE SAME PAGE SERVES OTHER TABLES TO OTHER VISITS: archived variants at $21.95, $23.95 and $24.95, one US-served copy displaying $12.50 a month billed annually while its own data array said $8.33, and a Turkey-served render that on 11 September 2026 held no monthly plan at all, only Annual 49.95, Semi-Annual 39.95 and Quarterly 19.95, with a Monthly 9.95 present in the same table four days later. App Store in-app prices differ again and are never mixed in.
Read the dimensions, not the composite
Decide which job you are paying for before you compare prices. If the text is yours and reads stiff, you are buying an editor, and the questions that matter are the word cap, the languages, and whether the output still says what you meant.
Then read the unit, and keep three things apart, because they are not the same question. How a plan is BILLED: monthly, quarterly, half-yearly or yearly, and the headline figure on a card says which view it was read on. What the price METERS, which is published per card and is not the same unit across products. And what a FREE allowance gives, which can be a daily refill or a one-time sample that ends after a few uses. Each card says what it read and on which date.
And read the terms before you paste anything you care about. A rewriter receives your whole draft, so who owns the result, whether you may use it commercially, and what the vendor may do with what you sent are sharper questions here than for a tool that only ever sees a prompt.
Where these numbers come from
Capability is sourced from public output-quality arenas (blind pairwise votes) or from a published accuracy study where no arena covers the category, usability from review-crowd aggregates weighted by sample size, value from verified pricing, and commercial terms from clause positions read off the vendor’s own legal documents on a stated date. Where none of those exists for a tool, the row carries a named criterion instead: a different measurement, taken from saved sources under its own rubric, and the card prints that criterion’s name and the question it answers in place of the axis heading, so the row is never read as the axis it could not fill. Full detail: methodology.
The order and the badge beside the leading card are computed from the composites when the site is built, and nobody places a card by hand. The build now ranks this category: a position appears beside each rankable card, and the leading card carries the badge shown above. The badge follows the composite order and nothing else, and it marks whichever card the build puts first on the date printed beside it. It is not a finding about which rewrite reads more human, and no card was placed by preference.
READ WHAT A ROW RESTS ON BEFORE READING ITS NUMBER. A composite in this category can rest largely on vendor documents, and the capability position is a renamed criterion rather than a measurement of rewriting quality. Each card says which of its rows carries what, beside the number rather than in a footnote. THAT DIFFERENCE IS INVISIBLE ON THE TABLE ABOVE AND IT IS THE MOST IMPORTANT THING ON THIS PAGE. The rows here are filled from very different evidence and the table cannot show it. A cell can rest on nothing but the seller's own paperwork. It can rest on a reading from tens of thousands of strangers on an app store. Where a card holds consumer records that disagree with each other, it prints them side by side with their own sample sizes rather than averaging them into one number. A card shows four rows filled whichever kind of evidence it stands on, the caveat about a thin card only appears below three rows of four, and the badge goes to whichever composite is higher. On 18 September 2026 the badge sits on a card whose cells rest on the seller's own paperwork. Read what the row rests on, then read the number.
ON COMMERCIAL TIES, as of September 2026: this site has joined no affiliate programme for AI humanizers and earns nothing from this category. If that changes, the disclosure arrives before the link.
