HumanizerEval

Leaderboard / Compare / Undetectable.ai vs Ryne

September 2026 review · same 50 texts

Undetectable.ai vs Ryne

In the September 2026 HumanizerEval review, Undetectable.ai and Ryne rewrote the same 50 English texts. Undetectable.ai cleared all 5 detectors on 15 of them; Ryne on 0. The difference is mostly Originality.ai: on 47 samples Undetectable.ai passed it where Ryne failed, and the reverse never happened.

Per-sample agreement

Per-sample agreement, September 2026. Counts are out of the 50 shared samples, computed at the 50% human-score threshold. Margin counts the samples only one tool passed, higher count first.
DetectorPassed more oftenMarginBoth passedNeither passed
Pangram 4.0Undetectable.ai12 to 7427
GPTZero 2026-09-13-baseUndetectable.ai44 to 042
Originality.ai turboUndetectable.ai47 to 003
ZeroGPT defaultUndetectable.ai19 to 0310
Winston AI 5.0Undetectable.ai36 to 0131
All 5 detectorsUndetectable.ai15 to 0035

Every count is computed from scores.csv at build time, not transcribed. “Neither passed” counts the texts that defeated both tools; on Pangram that was 27 of 50 here.

Quality and output discipline

Quality and output discipline, September 2026.
MeasureUndetectable.aiRyne
26%44%
28%80%
94%98%
78%94%
1.211.07
70
00
University / General Writing / More Human, v11srAggressive, beast mode
Websiteundetectable.ai ryne.ai

On per-sample quality scores, Undetectable.ai scored higher on 5 samples, Ryne on 33, and the two tied on 12. Ryne’s output was shorter on 42 of 50 samples; mean length ratios were 1.21 and 1.07, or 21% longer than the input and 7% longer than the input respectively.

Where each one outperforms the other

Undetectable.ai

  • Pangram: passed 16 of 50 against 11, including 12 samples where Ryne failed, against 7 the other way.
  • GPTZero: passed 48 of 50 against 4, including 44 samples where Ryne failed, against 0 the other way.
  • Originality.ai: passed 47 of 50 against 0, including 47 samples where Ryne failed, against 0 the other way.
  • ZeroGPT: passed 50 of 50 against 31, including 19 samples where Ryne failed, against 0 the other way.
  • Winston AI: passed 49 of 50 against 13, including 36 samples where Ryne failed, against 0 the other way.

Ryne

  • Pangram: passed 7 samples where Undetectable.ai failed, even though it was detected more often overall, passing 11 to 16.
  • Factual consistency: 44% against 26%.
  • Naturalness: 80% against 28%.
  • Syntax integrity: 98% against 94%.
  • Stance preservation: 94% against 78%.
  • Length: shorter output on 42 of 50 samples, which matters under a word limit.

Undetectable.ai vs Ryne FAQ

Is Undetectable.ai better than Ryne?

In the September 2026 HumanizerEval review, Undetectable.ai cleared all 5 detectors on 15 of the 50 shared samples and Ryne on 0. Quality ran 5 samples to 33, with 12 ties.

Which humanizer is best for Pangram, Undetectable.ai or Ryne?

Undetectable.ai. In September 2026, Undetectable.ai passed Pangram on 16 of the 50 shared samples and Ryne on 11. On 12 samples Undetectable.ai passed where Ryne failed; the reverse happened on 7. Both failed on 27.

Which humanizer changes the text less?

Ryne. It scored higher on per-sample quality on 33 of 50 samples, against 5. Undetectable.ai’s outputs averaged 1.21× the input length and passed factual consistency on 26%; Ryne’s averaged 1.07× and passed on 44%. On stance preservation the split was 78% to 94%. Ryne produced the shorter output on 42 of 50 samples.

More comparisons