AI copywriting tools have gone from novelty to necessity. But they’re not all the same—and using the wrong one for your task costs time and quality. Here’s what we found after extensive testing.
The Contenders
We tested:
- Jasper — The original AI copywriting platform
- Copy.ai — Workflow-focused with templates
- Claude — Anthropic’s conversational AI
- ChatGPT — OpenAI’s flagship
- Writesonic — Budget-friendly option
Test Methodology
For each tool, we generated:
- 20 Facebook ad variations
- 20 email subject lines
- 20 product descriptions
- 20 landing page headlines
- 20 blog post outlines
We then had a panel of marketers blind-rate the outputs on clarity, persuasiveness, and brand appropriateness.
Results by Use Case
Facebook/Meta Ads: Copy.ai Wins
Copy.ai’s template-driven approach shines for ads. Their “Pain-Agitate-Solution” and “Before-After-Bridge” frameworks consistently produced scroll-stopping copy.
Example prompt: “Facebook ad for productivity app targeting remote workers”
Copy.ai output:
“You’re not lazy. You’re working in chaos. [App] turns your scattered to-do list into a focused daily plan. 2 minutes to set up. Free forever.”
The structured approach forced better outputs than open-ended prompts.
Long-Form Content: Claude Wins
For blog posts, landing pages, and anything over 500 words, Claude consistently produced more coherent, better-structured content. It follows instructions more precisely and maintains voice across longer pieces.
Why it works: Claude handles complex briefs better. You can give it a style guide, examples of good content, and specific requirements—and it actually follows them.
Caveat: Claude doesn’t have built-in marketing templates. You need to know what you’re asking for.
Product Descriptions: Jasper Wins
Jasper’s e-commerce training shows in product descriptions. Outputs were consistently benefit-focused with natural keyword integration.
Jasper’s advantage: Brand Voice feature. Train it on your existing copy and outputs match your tone surprisingly well.
Email Subject Lines: It’s a Tie
Honestly, all tools performed similarly here. The differences came down to prompting skill more than tool capability.
Pro tip: Generate 20 options, pick 3, A/B test them. The AI gets you to “good enough” fast; testing finds the winner.
Pricing Reality Check
| Tool | Monthly Cost | Best For |
|---|---|---|
| Jasper | $49-125 | E-commerce, brand consistency |
| Copy.ai | $36-186 | Ads, workflows, teams |
| Claude Pro | $20 | Long-form, complex briefs |
| ChatGPT Plus | $20 | General purpose |
| Writesonic | $16-79 | Budget-conscious |
The Honest Truth About AI Copy
After 100+ pieces of generated content, here’s what we’ve learned:
AI is great at:
- First drafts (cuts time by 60-70%)
- Variations and A/B test options
- Overcoming blank page paralysis
- Reformatting existing content
AI still struggles with:
- Genuine originality
- Deep product knowledge
- Brand voice without training
- Emotional resonance
The real workflow: Use AI to generate 5 options in 2 minutes, then spend 10 minutes editing the best one. Total time: 12 minutes vs. 45+ minutes from scratch.
Our Recommendations
If you’re an agency or team: Copy.ai. Workflows and templates keep output consistent across team members.
If you’re a solo marketer: Claude Pro + ChatGPT Plus. $40/month total, covers all use cases.
If you’re in e-commerce: Jasper. The brand voice and product description features justify the higher cost.
If you’re budget-constrained: Writesonic or just Claude Pro. You’ll spend more time prompting but get good results.
A Word on Detection
Google and social platforms can now detect AI-generated content with reasonable accuracy. More importantly, audiences can often tell.
The solution isn’t avoidance—it’s editing. AI-generated, human-refined content performs well. AI-generated, published-as-is content often doesn’t.
We update this comparison quarterly as tools evolve.