HumanizerEvalSuggest a humanizerSuggest a tool

Leaderboard / Compare / WriteHuman vs Phrasly

October 2026 review · same 50 texts

WriteHuman vs Phrasly

In the October 2026 HumanizerEval review, WriteHuman and Phrasly rewrote the same 50 English texts. WriteHuman cleared all 6 detectors on 0 of them; Phrasly on 0. The difference is mostly GPTZero: on 23 samples WriteHuman passed it where Phrasly failed, and the reverse never happened. On Originality.ai 5.0 the two were close to even.

Per-sample agreement

Per-sample agreement, October 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 4.1WriteHuman11 to 0237
GPTZero 2026-10-07-baseWriteHuman23 to 0225
Originality.ai TurboWriteHuman14 to 0360
Originality.ai 5.0 model-5.0WriteHuman3 to 0047
ZeroGPT defaultWriteHuman7 to 0412
Winston AI 5.0WriteHuman5 to 0450
All 6 detectorsTied0 to 0050

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 37 of 50 here.

Quality and output discipline

Quality and output discipline, October 2026.
MeasureWriteHumanPhrasly
38%50%
50%70%
98%98%
50%84%
1.061.10
00
00
API defaultStandard model, API default (Phrasly Ultra not enabled on the account)
Websitewritehuman.ai phrasly.ai

On per-sample quality scores, WriteHuman scored higher on 6 samples, Phrasly on 30, and the two tied on 14. WriteHuman’s output was shorter on 32 of 50 samples; mean length ratios were 1.06 and 1.10, or 6% longer than the input and 10% longer than the input respectively.

Where each one outperforms the other

WriteHuman

  • Pangram: passed 13 of 50 against 2, including 11 samples where Phrasly failed, against 0 the other way.
  • GPTZero: passed 45 of 50 against 22, including 23 samples where Phrasly failed, against 0 the other way.
  • Originality.ai Turbo: passed 50 of 50 against 36, including 14 samples where Phrasly failed, against 0 the other way.
  • Originality.ai 5.0: passed 3 of 50 against 0, including 3 samples where Phrasly failed, against 0 the other way.
  • ZeroGPT: passed 48 of 50 against 41, including 7 samples where Phrasly failed, against 0 the other way.
  • Winston AI: passed 50 of 50 against 45, including 5 samples where Phrasly failed, against 0 the other way.
  • Length: shorter output on 32 of 50 samples, which matters under a word limit.

Phrasly

  • Factual consistency: 50% against 38%.
  • Naturalness: 70% against 50%.
  • Stance preservation: 84% against 50%.

WriteHuman vs Phrasly FAQ

Is WriteHuman better than Phrasly?

In the October 2026 HumanizerEval review, WriteHuman cleared all 6 detectors on 0 of the 50 shared samples and Phrasly on 0. On Originality.ai 5.0 the two were within 6 points of each other. Quality ran 6 samples to 30, with 14 ties.

Which humanizer is best for Pangram, WriteHuman or Phrasly?

WriteHuman. In October 2026, WriteHuman passed Pangram on 13 of the 50 shared samples and Phrasly on 2. On 11 samples WriteHuman passed where Phrasly failed; the reverse never happened. Both failed on 37.

Which humanizer changes the text less?

Phrasly. It scored higher on per-sample quality on 30 of 50 samples, against 6. WriteHuman’s outputs averaged 1.06× the input length and passed factual consistency on 38%; Phrasly’s averaged 1.10× and passed on 50%. On stance preservation the split was 50% to 84%. WriteHuman produced the shorter output on 32 of 50 samples.

More comparisons