AI Detector Comparisons: iLang vs twelve tools, one page

Quick verdict

iLang is the free fixer; GPTZero is the institutional detector.

Side by side

Pricing and Access

iLang is completely free with no signup or rate limits. You can use it as much as you want. GPTZero offers a free plan that limits you to 10,000 words per month, and its premium plans start at $12.99 per month. The free plan also requires a signup. For someone who just wants to check a few paragraphs, iLang is the easier option. But for educators who need to scan many documents, GPTZero's paid plans offer batch scanning and LMS integration.

Output and Guidance

iLang gives you a sentence level issue list across six dimensions: vocabulary, structure, tone, punctuation, logic, and rhythm. Each flagged fragment includes a problem explanation and a fix suggestion. GPTZero provides a document level probability score with sentence highlighting, but no direct suggestions for improving the text. It tells you if a sentence looks AI generated, but not how to change it. If you want to revise your writing, iLang guides you. If you only need a score, GPTZero gives you that.

Target Audience

GPTZero was built for educators and students. It is trusted by millions of teachers and integrates with learning management systems. It also offers plagiarism checking and authorship replay to prove human writing. iLang is designed for writers and editors who want to fix their text, not just get a score. It focuses on helping you improve the writing itself. So if you are a teacher grading papers, GPTZero fits. If you are a writer polishing a draft, iLang is the better tool.

Quick verdict

iLang is the smarter choice for writers who want to fix their text, not just detect AI.

Side by side

Pricing and Accessibility

Originality.ai is a paid platform with a limited free checker: 3 scans per day, up to 2,000 words each. The site notes that input from the free tool may be used for training. The full platform requires credits, starting at $12.95 per month. iLang Detect is completely free with no signup and no rate limits. Why pay for detection when you can get free, actionable fixes with iLang?

Output and Feedback

Originality.ai gives you a probability score from one of several models. You can choose Lite, Turbo, Academic, or multilingual. The score tells you how likely the text is AI generated, but it does not explain why. iLang Detect goes further. It analyzes your text at the sentence level across six dimensions: vocabulary, structure, tone, punctuation, logic, and rhythm. Every flagged fragment gets a problem explanation and a fix suggestion. You also get overall rewrite advice. This is useful for writers who want to improve their writing.

Accuracy and Features

Originality.ai claims 99%+ accuracy on leading AI models and a false positive rate below 1.5% for most models. Independent tests have found lower accuracy, ranging from 76% to 97%, with false positive rates between 2% and 5.7%. The tool also offers a plagiarism checker, fact checker, and team management. iLang does not make percentage claims. Instead, it focuses on identifying specific issues in your writing and helping you fix them. For writers who want to understand and improve their text, this approach is more practical.

Quick verdict

For writers who want to fix AI text, iLang is the editing winner.

Side by side

Pricing and signup

iLang is free to use with no signup required. No credits, no limits, no account. Copyleaks offers a free web AI detector, but its full platform is paid. Personal plans start at $13.99/month billed annually or $16.99 monthly, with credits that don't roll over. Pro and Enterprise plans cost more. For anyone on a budget, iLang's zero cost is a clear advantage.

Depth of analysis

iLang breaks down each sentence into six specific issues: vocabulary, structure, tone, punctuation, logic, and rhythm. Every flagged fragment gets an explanation and a fix suggestion. Copyleaks gives you an AI probability score and a plagiarism report, but it doesn't tell you how to improve the text. If you want to actually edit your writing, iLang's detail is more useful.

API and integrations

Copyleaks has a developer API for AI and plagiarism detection, plus browser extensions, a Google Docs add on, and LMS integrations. It's built for schools and businesses that need to scan lots of content at scale. iLang doesn't have a public API yet, so it's not suitable for automated workflows. For individual writers, though, that's rarely a problem.

Quick verdict

For writers who want to fix their writing, not just label it, iLang is the better choice.

Side by side

Free vs. freemium model

ZeroGPT offers a free tier with a 15,000 character limit and a monthly word allowance, but you'll need to pay for higher limits and batch features. iLang is completely free with no signup and no limits. You can use it as much as you want without ever entering a credit card. That simplicity matters for writers who just want to check and fix text quickly.

Score vs. actionable feedback

ZeroGPT highlights sentences and shows an AI percentage gauge, but it doesn't tell you what to change. iLang goes further: every flagged fragment comes with a problem explanation and a fix suggestion. It covers vocabulary, structure, tone, punctuation, logic, and rhythm. You get a clear path to improve your writing, not just a number.

Accuracy claims and transparency

ZeroGPT says it pushes toward 98% accuracy on internal evaluations, but it doesn't publish its methodology. The tool also has known false positives, like labeling the US Constitution as AI generated. iLang doesn't make bold accuracy claims. Instead, it focuses on helping you understand why something might be flagged, so you can decide for yourself.

Quick verdict

For writers who want actionable fixes, iLang is the clear winner; Winston AI suits teams needing verification.

Side by side

Pricing and Access

iLang is completely free with no signup required, and there is no rate limit. You can use it as much as you want. Winston AI offers a 14-day free trial with 2,000 credits, then paid plans start at $18 per month or $120 per year. For a casual user, iLang's pricing is much more accessible. But if you need ongoing checks for a team, Winston AI's subscription might make sense.

Output and Suggestions

iLang gives you a detailed list of issues across vocabulary, structure, tone, punctuation, logic, and rhythm. Each flagged fragment includes a problem explanation and a fix suggestion, plus overall rewrite advice. Winston AI provides an AI probability score and shareable PDF reports with sentence-level highlighting, but it does not offer any suggestions to improve the text. If you want to edit and revise, iLang is more helpful.

Features and Accuracy

Winston AI includes a plagiarism checker, AI image and deepfake detection, OCR for documents, and team seats for up to unlimited users. It claims 99.98% accuracy on its homepage, but independent reviews report real-world false positives around 8-10% and blind spots with Claude-generated text. iLang focuses solely on AI detection with detailed analysis, but it does not make a specific accuracy claim.

Quick verdict

iLang is the better choice for writers who want sentence-level fixes without paying or signing up.

Side by side

Free vs Freemium Model

iLang is completely free with no signup required and no rate limits. You can check as much text as you want. Sapling's free plan is limited to 2,000 characters per query, 20 snippets, and only free domains. To get higher limits, you need to pay $25 per month for Pro or $12 per month billed annually. This makes iLang much more accessible for casual users and students who don't want to pay.

Detection Output: Fixes vs Scores

iLang doesn't just give you a probability score. It analyses your text sentence by sentence across six dimensions: vocabulary, structure, tone, punctuation, logic, and rhythm. Each flagged fragment comes with an explanation and a fix suggestion. Sapling provides an overall score plus per-sentence perplexity and token-level classification, but it doesn't offer any guidance on how to improve the writing.

Accuracy and Third-Party Testing

Sapling claims a 97% detection rate and less than 3% false positive rate on longer texts. However, a March 2026 third-party benchmark of 2,400 samples scored it at 76% overall accuracy with a 17% false positive rate, the highest among six detectors tested. Nearly half of Claude-generated content passed undetected. iLang doesn't make such claims, but its focus on sentence-level issues gives writers a more practical tool.

Quick verdict

iLang is the better choice for anyone who wants to fix their writing, not just get a score.

Side by side

Output detail and guidance

Scribbr gives you a single AI probability score, either from its free or premium detector. The premium version claims 84% accuracy and says it never mislabels human text. iLang goes further: it breaks down the text into six dimensions and flags sentence-level problems. Every flagged fragment comes with a plain-English explanation and a rewrite suggestion. This means you get actionable feedback, not just a number. For a writer, that difference is huge.

Pricing and usage limits

Scribbr offers unlimited free checks, but each submission is capped at 1,200 words. To get premium detection, you must buy a plagiarism check starting at $19.95 per document. iLang is completely free with no signup and no word limit. You can check as much text as you want, as often as you want, without ever paying. That makes it far more accessible for long documents or repeated use.

Accuracy and real-world performance

Scribbr's own research says its premium detector hits 84% accuracy and catches all GPT-4 text. But an independent 600-sample benchmark found around 72.8% detection and a 9.2% false-alarm rate. iLang doesn't publish accuracy numbers, but it focuses on catching the telltale patterns of AI writing at the sentence level. Its strength is transparency: you see exactly which parts look suspicious and why, so you can judge for yourself.

Quick verdict

For writers who want to fix their text, iLang is the better choice.

Side by side

Output detail: score vs. problems

QuillBot returns a single AI percentage score. You get a number, but no explanation of which parts triggered the detection or what to do about them. iLang, in contrast, lists every flagged sentence and breaks it down across vocabulary, structure, tone, punctuation, logic, and rhythm. Each fragment gets a plain explanation of the issue and a suggested rewrite. That difference matters when you actually want to edit your work.

Pricing and access limits

iLang is free forever with no signup and no rate limit. You can scan as much text as you want, whenever you want. QuillBot's free tier caps scans at about 1,200 words per check and limits how many checks you can run per day, according to third-party pricing reviews. To remove those limits, you need QuillBot Premium at $8.33 per month billed annually. That subscription also unlocks the paraphraser, humanizer, and other tools, but the detector itself is behind a paywall for heavy use.

Language support depth vs. breadth

QuillBot supports over 20 languages, making it a solid choice for non-English writers. iLang currently only works with English, though there is a Chinese version at detect.ilang.cn. That narrower focus lets iLang dig deeper into English sentence structure and offer more precise feedback. If you write in multiple languages, QuillBot's breadth is a clear advantage. If you write primarily in English and want thorough analysis, iLang's depth wins.

Quick verdict

iLang is more useful for anyone who wants to fix their writing, not just get a score.

Side by side

Pricing and access

Turnitin is only available through institutional subscriptions. No free trial, no individual checkout. You have to be a student or teacher at a paying school. iLang is completely free with no signup and no limits. Anyone can paste text and get a full analysis right away.

What you get back

Turnitin gives a percentage score inside the Similarity Report. It tells you how much of the text might be AI written. iLang goes deeper. It highlights fragments and explains what’s wrong with vocabulary, structure, tone, punctuation, logic, or rhythm. Each issue has a fix suggestion, plus overall rewrite advice.

False positive track record

Turnitin’s press release claimed a 98% confidence rating and a false positive rate under 1% for documents with more than 20% AI content. But Vanderbilt, Northwestern, and Michigan State all disabled the tool because of misplaced accusations. Turnitin itself warns that scores below 20% are less reliable. iLang has no such controversy because it’s focused on improvement, not judgment.

Quick verdict

For anyone who wants to actually fix their writing, iLang is the practical choice.

Side by side

Pricing and availability

Crossplag's AI detector was free to use, but the standalone site is gone. It's now part of Inspera, which serves institutions. You can't just sign up and use it anymore. iLang is still free with no signup. You paste your text and get results immediately. No credits, no limits, no account needed. That's a clear advantage for anyone who doesn't want to hunt for a working tool.

What you get back

Crossplag gave you a single percentage score: how likely the text is AI generated. That's it. iLang shows you a list of issues per sentence across six categories like vocabulary, structure, and tone. Each issue comes with a plain English explanation and a fix suggestion. If you're trying to edit your work, iLang tells you what to change. Crossplag just told you to worry.

Accuracy and trust

Crossplag's original team claimed high accuracy, but independent tests found it missed most AI texts and had a high false positive rate. The product page is gone, so you can't verify claims. iLang doesn't just give a score. It shows you exactly which sentences look off and why. You can judge for yourself. That transparency builds trust. You don't have to take a black box number on faith.

Quick verdict

iLang is the smarter choice for writers who want to fix AI issues, not just bypass them.

Side by side

Output: fixes vs. scores

iLang Detect shows you exactly which sentences look AI-generated and explains why: vocabulary, structure, tone, punctuation, logic, or rhythm. Every flagged fragment comes with a problem explanation and a fix suggestion, plus overall rewrite advice. Undetectable AI gives you aggregated verdicts across multiple detector models (ChatGPT, GPT 5, Claude, Gemini, etc.) but offers no text-level fixes. If you want to improve your writing, not just get a score, iLang gives you a path forward.

Pricing and conflict of interest

iLang is completely free with no signup and no rate limit. You can use it as much as you want. Undetectable AI's detector is free, but the company also sells a Humanizer that rewrites text to evade detection. That's a clear conflict of interest: they detect AI and then help you hide it. Paid plans start at $5 per month billed yearly. Independent reviews on Trustpilot and sites like Originality.ai show inconsistent results, and some users report billing issues after cancellation.

Accuracy claims and reality

Undetectable AI claims "100% detection, 0% false positives" and cites peer-reviewed research of "up to 100% accuracy." Independent tests paint a different picture: bypass results swing from 0% to 93% depending on the tester, and Originality.ai found that the Humanizer's output was still 100% AI flagged. iLang doesn't make overblown accuracy promises. It gives you a transparent set of flagged sentences with explanations, so you can decide what to change.

Quick verdict

For writers who want actionable and free fixes, iLang is the better choice.

Side by side

Pricing and access

iLang is free to use with no signup and no rate limit. You just paste text and get results. Grammarly's AI Detector is freemium: the free web checker gives you an AI percentage, but the Pro plan at $12 a month (billed yearly) unlocks the full AI Detector agent, Authorship, and plagiarism tools. There's also a 100 AI prompts per month limit on the free plan. If you don't want to pay or create an account, iLang wins.

Detail of the output

iLang gives you a sentence-level issue list across six dimensions: vocabulary, structure, tone, punctuation, logic, and rhythm. Each flagged fragment gets a problem explanation and a fix suggestion, plus overall rewrite advice. Grammarly shows an AI percentage score with flagged sentences and explanations, but it doesn't offer per-issue fix suggestions. Instead, you get a one-click handoff to the AI Rewriter within the suite. That's a different kind of help.

Standalone vs. suite integration

iLang is a focused AI detector tool. You go to the site, paste your text, and get a detailed analysis. Grammarly's AI Detector is embedded in the broader Grammarly suite, which includes a browser extension, desktop app, and writing assistant. That makes it convenient if you already use Grammarly for grammar checks. But if you just want to check a piece of text without the extra baggage, iLang's simplicity is a strength.