Publication standard
Methodology
We compare every named service against the same eight fields: native image workflow, video, character control, access, public pricing, adult-use policy, best-fit workflow, and material limits. A feature is documented only when a current first-party page supports it. We do not convert missing data into a positive or negative score.
Our evidence ladder
- DocumentedCurrent first-party product, help, price, policy, or legal page.
- Observed limitationA material field is absent, inaccessible, contradictory, or requires an account.
- Editorial interpretationOur best-fit conclusion, kept separate from vendor claims.
Comparison rules
All five named services receive the same fields. “Unclear” is a visible data state, not a zero. We do not claim hands-on output quality without a controlled test. Prices are dated snapshots and direct generator capability is not inferred from chat, voice, or uploaded creator media.
The eight fields, defined
- Native image workflow — what the tool generates directly, without a third-party plugin
- Video — whether motion or video generation exists natively, and under what limits
- Character control — how consistently a described character can be regenerated across sessions
- Access — signup requirements, waitlists, or regional gating
- Public pricing — the current published price, not a promotional rate; see Pricing methodology
- Adult-use policy — whether the vendor's own terms permit the adult use case this comparison covers
- Best-fit workflow — the use case the tool is actually built around, versus one it merely tolerates
- Material limits — rate limits, credit systems, or content restrictions that materially change the experience
Update cadence
Vendors change pricing and policy without notice. When we or a reader identifies a change, the affected comparison is corrected and the page's review date is updated — see Editorial independence for how corrections are handled.