We make one of these, so treat this page accordingly. What follows is not a ranked table of competitors with star ratings, and there is a reason for that: we would be publishing prices and feature claims about other people’s products that we cannot verify and that change without notice.<\/p>\n
What we can give you is the set of questions that actually separate these tools, because after using and rebuilding one for a couple of years, the differences that matter are not the ones the comparison posts rank on.<\/p>\n
The pricing model tells you more about how a tool will behave than the feature list does. A tool that bills per word has a commercial interest in you generating more words. A tool that bills per site does not care how much you write and has to make the writing good enough to keep you.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n
Two models exist. Either the vendor buys AI capacity and resells it to you inside a plan, or you bring your own provider key and the vendor charges only for the software.<\/p>\n
Resold capacity is simpler to start and has a metre running. You get credits, words, or “generations”, and when they run out you either stop or upgrade. Bring-your-own-key means one more setup step and then no metre: your provider bills you at their published rate, and the plugin’s price is fixed.<\/p>\n
Neither is correct in the abstract. If you publish four posts a month, resold capacity is probably cheaper and definitely easier. If you publish a hundred, or run client sites, the metre becomes the dominant cost and the arithmetic flips hard. Work out your own numbers before choosing \u2014 ours are in the cost section here<\/a>.<\/p>\n Ask directly, and read the answer carefully. “Automated publishing” and “scheduled drafts” are very different products wearing similar words.<\/p>\n Ours defaults to This is the question nobody asks and everybody regrets. If generated posts are stored as shortcodes, in custom tables, or rendered through the plugin at page load, deactivating the plugin empties your site.<\/p>\n Test it before you commit: generate one post on a staging site, deactivate the plugin, and look at the front end. If the article is still there as ordinary content, you can leave whenever you like. If it is not, you cannot.<\/p>\n Per-call token counts and an estimated cost, grouped by the article that caused them. Without it you have no way to tell an expensive model choice from a cheap one, and no way to answer “why was this month higher”.<\/p>\n APIs rate-limit and go down. A tool tied to one provider stops with them. A tool with a failover chain carries on with a different model, which is worth knowing about in advance because the second model may write differently.<\/p>\n The most useful signal in this market. A vendor whose site admits a limitation \u2014 a domain cap, a feature that does not exist yet, a case where the tool is the wrong choice \u2014 is a vendor whose other claims you can weigh. A page of unqualified superlatives tells you nothing except that nobody edited it.<\/p>\n2. Does anything publish without a human?<\/h3>\n
draft<\/code>. Direct publishing is available, but it is a setting you have to go and change deliberately, and the default is the safe one rather than the impressive one. That is the distinction worth looking for in any tool you evaluate: not whether autonomous publishing is possible, but whether it is what happens when you do nothing.<\/p>\n3. What happens to your content if you uninstall?<\/h3>\n
4. Can you see what each run cost?<\/h3>\n
5. What happens when the provider fails?<\/h3>\n
6. Is it honest about what it cannot do?<\/h3>\n