Skip to content
November 2026 results: WriteHuman first, Phrasly climbs to fifth. Read the analysis →
HumanizerBench

Head to head · November 2026 cycle

Ryne AI vs SupWriter

Ryne AI finished 0.2 points ahead of SupWriter in the November 2026 cycle, 61.24 to 61.05, ranking #8 against #9 in a field of 16. Ryne AI scored higher on 3 of 6 detectors and 3 of 6 writing categories. SupWriter came out ahead on GPTZero (21.1 vs 10.6), discussion board prompts (65.4 vs 60.5) and blog post prompts (60.1 vs 55.5). The bypass-rate gap, 45.9 to 46.2, sits inside both tools' 95% confidence intervals, so treat bypass as a draw.

61.24 /100
overall score
#8 /16
rank -
+0.19
← Ryne AI leads
Detectors
3 – 2 (1 tie)
Categories
3 – 3
Components
1 – 3 (1 tie)
61.05 /100
overall score
#9 /16
rank ▲ 2

30 prompts · Last tested · Methodology v1.3.0

Score components

What the overall score is made of: bypass rate weighs 42%, meaning preservation 32%, readability 16%, consistency across categories 10%. Output-quality penalties come off the total. How scoring works →

Bypass rate CIs overlap SupWriter by 0.3
45.9 46.2
Meaning preservation CIs overlap SupWriter by 0.4
77.1 77.5
Readability SupWriter by 1.3
47.3 48.6
Consistency Ryne AI by 6.4
97.2 90.8
Penalties fewer is better Even
None None

CIs overlap marks a gap that sits inside both tools' published 95% confidence intervals for that component; it may not survive another cycle.

Detector by detector

Share of each tool's outputs that a detector classified as human-written. Ryne AI took 3 of 6, with 1 tied.

GPTZero SupWriter by 10.5
10.6 21.1
Originality.ai Ryne AI by 1.4
9.3 7.9
Copyleaks Ryne AI by 1.3
83.0 81.8
Winston AI Ryne AI by 6.3
96.6 90.3
ZeroGPT SupWriter by 0.2
75.9 76.1
Pangram Even
0.0 0.0

Writing categories

Category score per writing context: bypass credit only for real rewrites, blended with the category's own meaning preservation and readability. Small categories swing; the prompt count is shown on each row. How category scores work →

Academic Essay Application Essay Blog Post Marketing Copy Discussion Board News Article Academic Essay: Ryne AI 57.0 · SupWriter 54.7 Application Essay: Ryne AI 57.6 · SupWriter 57.3 Blog Post: Ryne AI 55.5 · SupWriter 60.1 Marketing Copy: Ryne AI 59.6 · SupWriter 57.0 Discussion Board: Ryne AI 60.5 · SupWriter 65.4 News Article: Ryne AI 52.5 · SupWriter 53.9
Ryne AI SupWriter Outer ring = 100
Academic Essay 6 prompts Ryne AI by 2.4
57.0 54.7
Application Essay 6 prompts Ryne AI by 0.3
57.6 57.3
Blog Post 6 prompts SupWriter by 4.5
55.5 60.1
Marketing Copy 6 prompts Ryne AI by 2.6
59.6 57.0
Discussion Board 3 prompts SupWriter by 4.9
60.5 65.4
News Article 3 prompts SupWriter by 1.4
52.5 53.9

Where each one wins

Every measure above that one tool won outright, largest margin first within each group.

Ryne AI

7 wins
  • Consistency Score 97.2 vs 90.8
  • Winston AI Detector 96.6 vs 90.3
  • Originality.ai Detector 9.3 vs 7.9
  • Copyleaks Detector 83.0 vs 81.8
  • Marketing Copy Category 59.6 vs 57.0
  • Academic Essay Category 57.0 vs 54.7
  • Application Essay Category 57.6 vs 57.3

SupWriter

8 wins
  • Readability Score 48.6 vs 47.3
  • Meaning preservation Score 77.5 vs 77.1
  • Bypass rate Score 46.2 vs 45.9
  • GPTZero Detector 21.1 vs 10.6
  • ZeroGPT Detector 76.1 vs 75.9
  • Discussion Board Category 65.4 vs 60.5
  • Blog Post Category 60.1 vs 55.5
  • News Article Category 53.9 vs 52.5

Same prompt, both outputs

Both tools were given this AI-written passage in the November 2026 cycle. Below it is what each one returned. This prompt was picked by a fixed rule, not by how the tools scored.

Personal Statement · Application Essay · written by gpt-6-sol · 363 words

The first time I noticed a gap between what people intend to do and what they actually do, I was trying to save money. I had a clear budget, a reason to follow it, and every intention of sticking to it. Yet small purchases kept adding up. What interested me was not simply that I made poor decisions; it was that I made them while understanding their consequences. I began to wonder how many choices that appear irrational are actually predictable responses to the way a decision is presented.

Behavioral economics appeals to me because it takes that question seriously. Traditional economic models offer powerful ways to understand incentives and trade-offs, but they can miss the effects of habit, emotion, social pressure, and limited attention. Behavioral economics brings these influences into the picture. I want to study how people make decisions in practice, not only how they might decide under ideal conditions.

I am particularly interested in the difference between helping people make better choices and simply telling them what to do. A well-designed reminder, a clearer comparison of options, or a change in a default can make an important decision easier without removing anyone’s freedom. That possibility excites me, but it also raises questions I want to examine carefully: Who decides what counts as a “better” choice? When does a helpful nudge become manipulation? How can researchers tell whether an intervention works beyond a single experiment?

Studying behavioral economics would give me the tools to explore those questions rigorously. I want to learn how to design experiments, evaluate evidence, and connect findings from psychology with economic analysis. I would be especially interested in applying those skills to personal finance, where small, repeated decisions can have lasting effects and where advice alone often falls short.

My experience with budgeting did not give me an answer, but it gave me a question that has stayed with me. Why do people so often struggle to act on what they value, and how can we make that easier? I want to study behavioral economics because it offers a way to investigate that question with both curiosity about human behavior and a commitment to improving everyday decisions.

Show the full input

377 words (input 363)

The first instance where I noticed a gap between what people want to do, and what they actually do was when I tried to save money. I set out to accomplish this task with a precise budget, a reason to adhere to it, and the plan to do so. However, small purchases kept occurring. What I found interesting was not that I made bad choices, but rather that I made them knowing what would happen. I started to think about how many choices that might seem irrational are actually predictable reactions to the presentation of a decision.

I’m drawn to behavioral economics because it takes that question seriously. Traditional economic models are useful but can be misleading as they do not take habit, emotion, social influence, and limited attention into account. Behavioral economics incorporates these influences into the picture. I want to study how people make decisions in practice, not just how they would decide in the best possible world.

I am especially curious about helping people make better choices versus just telling them what to do. An effective nudge, a clearer view of the choices, or a change in default can make an important choice easier, without removing anyone’s freedom. I find that possibility exciting, but it raises questions I want to explore further: who gets to decide what a “better” one is? At what point does something go from being helpful to manipulative? How can researchers determine whether an intervention works beyond one experiment?

If I studied behavioral economics, I would be equipped to explore those questions. I want to know about the evidence that supports or refutes the ideas of psychology and how they can be connected to economics. I am particularly interested in applying those skills to personal finance, in which small and repeated decisions can have long-lasting effects, and where the advice is often not enough.

My experience with budgeting did not arrive at an answer, but it did leave me with a question that has lingered. How come people so frequently struggle to do what they value? What can we do to make this easier? My interest in behavioral economics arises from my fascination towards the study of a matter that aims to transform the everyday choices of people at large.

Show the full output
  • GPTZero0.00caught
  • Pangram0.00caught
  • Winston AI1.00passed
  • ZeroGPT0.95passed
  • Copyleaks1.00passed
  • Originality.ai0.07caught

Passed 3 of 6 detectors.

Every Ryne AI run in November 2026 →

361 words (input 363)

As I was trying to save some money, I noticed for the first time a gap between what people intend to do and actually do. I had set a specific budget, had good reasons to follow it and intended it to stick. However, minor expenses continued to accrue. I did not just make poor decisions; I made poor decisions knowing full well that they were poor decisions. I wondered how many seemingly irrational choices are in fact predictable reactions to the way the choice is framed.

Behavioral economics piques my interest because it treats that question seriously. Human beings are capable of modifying their thinking and response patterns through mental strategies, training, and rehearsal, as established by cognitive and behavioural psychologists. Behavioral economics takes these influences into account. I am interested in studying people’s decisions in real life, not just how they would decide in an ideal world.

I’m especially interested in the difference between helping people make better choices and just telling them what to do. A well-designed prompt, a clearer comparative presentation of options or a change to a default can ease an important decision without removing anyone’s freedom. The prospect excites me, but also raises questions I want to interrogate:who determines whether this is a “better” one? When does influence cross over into manipulation? How can scientists tell whether something works beyond a single experiment?

Studying behavioral economics would equip me to explore these questions more deeply. I am interested in learning about designing experiments, appraising evidence and linking psychological findings to economic analysis. I’m particularly interested in applying those skills to personal finance, an area where small decisions repeated over time can have sizable effects and where a lack of advice is often not the issue.

My budget experience didn’t give me an answer, but it gave me a question that has stayed with me. People have trouble acting on what’s important to them. How can we make it easier for them to act? I am eager to study behavioral economics because it allows a scholar to answer that question while having a genuine curiosity about human behaviour as well as a commitment to improving everyday decisions.

Show the full output
  • GPTZero0.00caught
  • Pangram0.00caught
  • Winston AI1.00passed
  • ZeroGPT0.86passed
  • Copyleaks1.00passed
  • Originality.ai0.10caught

Passed 3 of 6 detectors.

Every SupWriter run in November 2026 →

Each chip is one detector's score for that output, from 0 (AI) to 1 (human). A score of 0.50 or higher counts as a pass and shows green; below that the detector caught it and the chip shows red.

Questions people ask

Is Ryne AI better than SupWriter?

Ryne AI finished 0.2 points ahead of SupWriter in the November 2026 cycle, 61.24 to 61.05, ranking #8 against #9 in a field of 16. Ryne AI scored higher on 3 of 6 detectors and 3 of 6 writing categories. Both tools ran the same 30 prompts, scored by the same 6 detectors, under methodology v1.3.0; every input, output and verdict is published.

Which bypasses AI detectors better, Ryne AI or SupWriter?

SupWriter posted the higher bypass rate, 46.2 vs 45.9, and scored higher on 2 of 6 detectors. Ryne AI led on Originality.ai, Copyleaks and Winston AI; SupWriter led on GPTZero and ZeroGPT. The overall bypass gap is inside both 95% confidence intervals, so it is not a reliable difference.

Do Ryne AI and SupWriter keep the original meaning?

SupWriter preserved meaning better, 77.5 vs 77.1 on our 0–100 similarity scale, though the confidence intervals overlap. On readability, SupWriter rated higher, 48.6 vs 47.3. Neither tool drew an output-quality penalty this cycle.