The sticker price on an AI version of yourself is now about the cost of a gym membership for a small team. Coachvox lists $99/month, or $996 a year, plus a 10% revenue share on all paid AI subscriptions. Delphi's tiers have been reported at $79/month for Builder and $299/month for Scaler on annual billing, and elsewhere at roughly $99–$349/month plus about 20% of subscriber income.

That second number is the one that decides whether this is a product or a hobby.

Two pricing models, one big difference

The category has quietly split. One camp charges a modest monthly fee and then takes a slice of everything your clone earns. The other charges a bigger flat license and takes nothing on top.

The slice looks harmless at launch. A 10% platform fee removes $150 from every $1,500 subscription before Stripe fees and model costs. Run that across a real subscriber base and it compounds: on premium $1,000 to $2,000 annual subscriptions, a 10% share is $100 to $200 per subscriber per year, or $10,000 to $20,000 annually at 100 subscribers.

On a $1,500 annual subscription sold through Coachvox's built-in checkout, one 2026 breakdown puts the net at roughly $1,306 after the 10% plus Stripe's 2.9% and 30 cents, against roughly $1,456 if you run your own paywall.

Same product. Same client. A different line in the contract.

Nobody can agree on what Delphi takes

Here's where it gets strange. Delphi's take rate is reported three different ways depending on who's writing.

One comparison says Builder plan documentation states a 15% Delphi fee on monetization as of August 11, 2026. Another says the last publicly documented Delphi rate was 20% of subscription revenue. A third says flatly that Delphi does not publish a revenue-share figure on their pricing page as of August 2026, and that its pricing page shows monetization features only under the top Immortal tier.

If the number that determines your margin is not on the pricing page, that is the number to get in writing before you upload a decade of content.

Read the comparisons, then check who published them

Almost every "honest comparison" of AI clone tools is written by a company selling an AI clone tool. To their credit, several say so.

Personify ends its Delphi-versus-Coachvox piece by admitting "Yes, this is our product," and telling readers to judge the table rather than its say-so. Timeless AI states on its Delphi alternative page that it publishes the page, makes a competing personal AI, and will not make claims about another company's pricing, plans or features. BuddyPro's review of Delphi closes by pointing readers to its own comparison piece and its own site.

The workable rule: treat every vendor comparison as a lead, never as a source. Then ask the platform three questions in email. What percentage do you take? Does it apply on every plan or only the tier that allows monetization? Is it charged on top of Stripe processing or inclusive of it?

Build the clone after you have the answers, not before.