Comparison
AI content detectors compared
An objective feature comparison of warning-only AI detectors, based on each product's own public documentation. Our measured figures come from a held-out set the model never trained on.
Feature comparison
Verified from public product pages, August 2026.
| Feature | isthisaigenerated.app | GPTZero | Originality.ai |
|---|---|---|---|
| Image detection | Yes — free, no account | No (text-focused) | No (text-focused) |
| Sampled-video detection | Yes — free, no account | No | No |
| Text detection | Yes — warning-only, 60+ words | Yes — free tier | Yes — 3 free scans/day, up to 2,000 words |
| Document detection (PDF/DOCX) | Yes — free, per-section | Limited | Limited |
| API | Yes — public, free tier 100 tokens/week | Yes — paid | Yes — paid |
| Measured accuracy published | Yes — recall + false-positive rate with sample sizes | Claims, no public held-out numbers | Claims 97.8% multilingual, no public held-out set |
| Warning-only framing | Yes — "signals, not proof" | Partial | Partial — "probability, not guilt" |
| Marketplace checkers | Yes — Vinted, Marktplaats, 2dehands, Tinder, Catawiki | No | No |
| Free tier | Unlimited image/video checks, 100 API tokens/week | Limited free scans | 3 free scans/day |
How we measure
Our image detector reports 78.1% strong warnings on 653 AI images and 4.0% false warnings on 795 real images, from a held-out set. Video: 82.6% caught on 23 videos. Competitor figures are their own public claims, not independently verified here.
No detector output is standalone proof. A low score does not prove human origin; a high score does not prove AI origin.