Artificial intelligence is reshaping the hiring process, but for many recent graduates, it is also creating new frustrations. As employers increasingly rely on automated screening tools to sort through thousands of applications, job seekers say they worry qualified candidates are being filtered out before a hiring manager ever sees their resume.

Marist graduate Samantha Kehler joined FOX Business’ Maria Bartiromo on “Mornings with Maria” to discuss how AI has changed her search for work and why she believes automated hiring systems have made breaking into today’s job market even more difficult.

“I’ve tried to definitely do a little bit of training,” Kehler said on learning AI. “It definitely helped me understand how to work the AI in your favor rather than just getting kind of a short answer from AI and really using it to not just answer my questions, but to help me with research and synthesize information faster.”

DIMON URGES CALM OVER FEAR ABOUT AI’S IMPACT ON JOBS: ‘STOP BEING BREATHLESS OVER IT’

While AI can help applicants tailor resumes and conduct research, many companies now use applicant tracking systems to scan resumes for keywords before they ever reach a recruiter. That shift has fueled concerns among job seekers that the hiring process is becoming less personal.

“I know that AI is pretty much the one who is reading my application,” Kehler said. “I don’t feel like my resume and my cover letters are being read by human eyes… I know I’m just getting filtered out if I don’t have a specific keyword.”

INSIDE THE AI BOOM: A TALENT CHIEF’S PLAYBOOK FOR WINNING IN THE JOB MARKET

Kehler added that receiving rejection emails “at two in the morning” reinforces her belief that automated systems are increasingly driving the hiring process, leaving many applicants wondering whether they ever had a chance to make a human first impression.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

The Indian stock market extended losses for the fifth consecutive session, with Sensex and Nifty tumbling more than 1% intraday before paring most of the losses and closing 0.4% lower each on Friday as oil prices above $100 per barrel, FII selling and other factors spooked investors.

Analyst Sudeep Shah, Vice President and Head of Technical & Derivatives Research at SBI Securities, interacted with ETMarkets regarding the outlook for the Nifty and bank, as well as an index strategy for the upcoming week. The following are the edited excerpts from his chat:

Nifty slipped over 2% this week, plunging in all five sessions. What is your view on Nifty going forward?

Last week, the benchmark Nifty index traded within a narrow range during the first two trading sessions. However, selling pressure intensified during the final three sessions, resulting in a sharp correction. Eventually, the index ended the week at 23,767 level, registering a decline of 2.33%. A sharp surge in Brent crude oil prices amid the escalation of the US-Iran conflict, coupled with a notable rise in the US 10-year bond yield, weighed heavily on investor sentiment across global markets. Amid this sharp deterioration in sentiment, Friday’s price action offered the first sign that the decline may be approaching a crucial juncture.On Friday, the index found support near the 61.8% Fibonacci retracement level of its recent upward rally from 23,070 to 24,531 and staged a modest pullback. Consequently, the index formed a bearish candle with a small lower shadow on the weekly chart, indicating some buying interest at lower levels. Notably, Friday’s recovery was largely driven by strength in the large-cap space. While the Fibonacci support triggered a pullback, the momentum indicators tell a more cautious story beneath the surface.

From a technical perspective, the index is currently trading below its key short and long-term moving averages, while the 20-day and 50-day EMAs are trending lower, reflecting weakening momentum. The daily RSI is hovering around the 43 mark and remains below its 9-day average, indicating subdued momentum. Meanwhile, the MACD histogram continues to remain below the zero line, further reinforcing the prevailing bearish undertone. With momentum still tilted in favour of the bears, the battle now shifts to a crucial support zone that could determine the index’s next directional move.
Going ahead, the 23,650–23,600 zone will act as an important support area for the index. A sustained move below 23,600 could extend the correction towards 23,450, followed by the 23,300 level. On the upside, the 50-day EMA zone of 23,950–24,000 is likely to act as an important hurdle.

Rough week for bank stocks as the index declined over 3% this week. How are charts looking for Bank Nifty?

The Bank Nifty witnessed heightened volatility during the week. After scaling a high of 58,228, the index came under sharp selling pressure and underwent a meaningful correction. However, buying interest emerged near the 56,000 level, helping the index stage a strong recovery from lower levels. Despite the rebound, Bank Nifty ended the week around 56,700, registering a loss of more than 3%.

On Friday, the index briefly slipped below its crucial 200-day EMA, indicating weakness in the broader trend. However, it managed to recover and close above this long-term moving average, highlighting the importance of this support zone. Meanwhile, momentum indicators and oscillators are currently signalling a sideways to range-bound trend, suggesting a lack of strong directional momentum in the near term.

Going forward, the 56,000-55,800 zone is expected to act as a key support area, as it coincides with the 50% Fibonacci retracement of the previous upward rally. A decisive and sustained breakdown below 55800 could trigger another round of selling pressure, paving the way for a sharper correction towards 55,000, followed by 54,400 in the short term.

On the upside, the 20-day EMA zone of 57,300-57,400 is likely to remain a significant resistance hurdle. Any pullback rally is expected to face supply pressure around this region, and a sustained move above it would be required to improve the near-term technical outlook.

What is the options data indicating about Nifty’s near-term trading range, and where are the key Call and Put positions building up ahead of the Monthly expiry?

The Put Call Ratio (PCR) slipped from 1.13 on July 17 to 0.68 on July 23 as bears attempted to gain the upper hand. Following the sharp pullback from 23,600 levels on July 24, the PCR improved to 0.83. Despite this recovery, call writers maintained dominance at the week’s close. Over the past four sessions, a steady rise in open interest alongside falling prices has signaled the buildup of short positions in index futures.

For context, Nifty had been consolidating within the 24,531–23,785 band for 28 sessions and the July 24 close below the lower end of this range confirmed a breakdown, raising concerns of further downside.

On the downside, the 23,600 strike carries significant put open interest, with put writing nearly eight times higher than call writing. This level is a crucial support zone, coinciding with the strong buying seen on July 24 after Nifty’s gap closed. Ahead of the monthly expiry, Nifty is most likely to hold this level, though any decisive breach could trigger put writers’ exit and accelerate near term weakness. On the upside, the 24,000 strike has notable call open interest, with call writing nearly three times higher than put writing, making it a strong resistance zone to watch as expiry approaches.

What are some stocks that are looking good for the week ahead?

Despite the broader market weakness, a few stocks continue to display strong relative strength and positive technical setups. HAL, Manappuram Finance, Titan, and United Spirits are currently looking promising and could remain in focus in the week ahead. Their resilient price structures and favorable momentum indicators suggest the potential for outperformance.

Can you share your outlook on Bluestone, HDFC Bank, Infosys, and IndusInd?

Bluestone delivered its strongest ever weekly close, surging nearly 29% following its quarterly results. The stock now trades comfortably above key short and long term moving averages, with a rising ADX signaling robust trend strength. The MACD’s expanding green histogram bars further reinforce bullish momentum. While a phase of healthy profit taking cannot be ruled out given RSI and ADX nearing peak levels, immediate support lies in the Rs 710–700 zone. The bullish bias is expected to persist as long as the stock holds above this zone.

HDFC Bank ended the week with a sharp 9% loss, recording lower closes across all five sessions. The stock trades well below its key moving averages and has closed below the lower band of the Bollinger Band for four consecutive days, a sign often associated with strong trends. RSI has slipped below 40, reflecting growing bearish momentum. The Rs 725–720 zone remains a critical support, and a decisive breach could trigger further weakness.

Infosys slipped over 5% for the week, closing below its key moving averages. The RSI continues to fall, indicating bearish momentum, while DI has crossed DI+ on the ADX with widening lines, underscoring strong seller control. The MACD line remains below the zero line on both daily and weekly charts, reinforcing the bearish bias. As long as the stock trades below the Rs 1,075–1,080 zone, weakness is likely to persist.

IndusInd Bank attempted a consolidation breakout on July 21 but failed to sustain higher levels, slipping below its 20 day EMA after quarterly results. RSI dropped sharply from 73 to 52, signaling loss of bullish momentum, while the MACD line crossing below the signal line points to building downside pressure. Unless the stock reclaims the Rs 1,045–1,050 zone, it is likely to remain under pressure.

(Disclaimer: Recommendations, suggestions, views and opinions given by the experts are their own. These do not represent the views of Economic Times)

U.K. consumer goods company Reckitt Benckiser RKT 0.24%increase; up pointing triangle said it agreed to divest of its hygiene arm in Russia, which has been dragging on sales due to changes to European Union sanctions on the country.

The maker of Durex condoms and Mucinex cold medicine said Friday that it was selling the Russian hygiene unit to Arnest Management. It didn’t disclose financial terms of the deal, but said the business represented around 1% of Reckitt’s net revenue in 2025.

Copyright ©2026 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 87990cbe856818d5eddac44c7b1cdeb8

Kolkata: AU Small Finance Bank on Saturday reported a 37% jump in first quarter net profit at Rs 796 crore over Rs 581 crore in the year ago period, backed by improved asset quality, normalisation of unsecured loans and healthy business growth.

The Jaipur-headquartered lender, which is in a transition into a universal bank, also announced the elevation of chief operating officer Yogesh Jain to deputy chief executive officer to strengthen the leadership bandwidth.

Its pre-provision operating profit rose 9% year-on-year at Rs 1435 crore, supported by a 32% surge in net interest income at Rs 2695 crore while a 97% fall in treasury earnings pulled other income down by 15% at Rs 689 crore.

The net interest margin for the quarter stood at 5.9%, improved by 47 basis points from what it was in the year-ago period. The key ratio however moderated 7 bps quarter-on-quarter.

The bank’s operating expenses increased 26% year-on-year at Rs 1949 crore, which the bank attributed to higher business volumes and investment in distribution, manpower, branding and technology.

Gross non-performing assets ratio improved to 2.1% as on June 30 from
2.5% a year prior, backed by a 22% decline in fresh slippages at Rs 798 crore.. The provision for the quarter came down 30% to Rs 372 crore from Rs 533 crore, led by normalisation of unsecured business, the bank said.
Its gross loan portfolio grew 23% year-on-year to Rs 1.44 lakh crore with secured business growth at 25% outpacing the unsecured loan expansion of 11%. Total deposits grew by 24% to Rs 1.58 crore.

“Cost-effective” is one of those phrases that means five different things depending on who’s asking. A freelancer producing 20 client images a week defines it very differently from a solo creator making three social posts a day. And “cheap” isn’t the same as “cost-effective” — a $5 plan that only lets you generate 30 usable images is worse value than a $30 plan giving you 3,000.

This piece takes ten of the most-used AI image platforms in 2026 and works out the actual economics: what a real image costs after credits, tiers, and annual discounts; what you get for free before paying anything; and how the effective cost per image changes once you start pushing volume. No headline prices without context — just the math.

The Cost-Effectiveness Framework

Four numbers determine whether a platform is genuinely a good deal:

• Effective cost per usable image. Not “per credit” — per image you’d actually keep and use.
• Free tier volume. Whether it’s enough to finish a real project before the paywall.
• Annual discount depth. Which platforms reward commitment, and by how much.
• Marginal cost at scale. What the 500th image of the month costs vs. the 50th.

A platform can win on one axis and lose on another. Below, each entry is scored on all four.

Quick Comparison

Rank	Platform	Cheapest Paid Entry	Effective $/Image	Free Tier	Annual Savings
1	Chat Image	$14.9/mo (annual)	$0.12–$0.20	3 credits (1 image)	25% off
2	Nano Banana Bingo	$19.9/mo (annual)	$0.015–$0.037/credit	3 credits	Up to 33% off
3	Krea AI	$5/mo (annual)	~$0.08	100 units/day	40% off
4	Hailuo AI	$7.99/mo (annual)	$0.012–$0.02	Trial credits	Up to 49% off
5	getimg.ai	$8/mo (annual)	$0.0015–$0.0033/credit	100 free credits	20% off
6	OpenArt	$12.6/seat/mo	$0.0018–$0.0035	Limited daily credits	Up to 27% off
7	CGDream	$10/mo	$0.04–$0.06	Free tier available	None advertised
8	EaseMate AI	$7.49/mo (annual)	$0.056–$0.098	200K chat tokens/day	~25% off
9	Envato	$16.5/mo (Core annual, no AI)	$0.39 (Plus)	No AI on free	Up to 35% off
10	Shutterstock AI	$29/mo (annual)	$0.58–$1.99/credit	No AI on free	~50% off vs. no-contract

The Rankings

1. Chat Image — Predictable Per-Image Math

Most cost-effectiveness questions get complicated the moment credit tiers get involved. Chat Image sidesteps that by charging a fixed 3 credits per GPT Image 2 generation, regardless of aspect ratio or prompt complexity. You always know what one image costs.

Run the numbers across the four tiers:

• Basic annual — $178.8/yr ÷ (300 credits × 12 ÷ 3) = $0.149/image
• Basic monthly — $19.9/mo ÷ 100 images = $0.199/image
• Professional annual — $358.8/yr ÷ 2,600 images = $0.138/image
• Enterprise annual — $2,398.8/yr ÷ 20,000 images = $0.120/image

The gap between the cheapest tier ($0.12) and the most expensive path ($0.199) is under 40% — narrow compared to platforms where per-image cost swings 10× depending on which model you pick. Annual billing shaves 25% off every tier, applied uniformly rather than gated behind higher plans.

Value case: if your monthly output sits between 80 and 220 GPT Image 2 renders, Basic annual is the sweet spot. Beyond 500 images, Professional or Enterprise annual drops effective cost below $0.14.

Pros

• Fixed 3 credits per image makes budgeting straightforward
• 25% annual discount applied uniformly to all paid tiers
• Effective cost stays within a narrow $0.12–$0.20 band
• Commercial-ready downloads included from the entry paid tier

Cons

• Free tier caps at 3 trial credits
• Single-model pricing — no cheaper alternative model inside the same subscription

Best value for: anyone whose workflow centers on GPT Image 2 and wants a predictable monthly bill.

2. Nano Banana Bingo — Tier-Adjustable Cost Per Image

Nano Banana Bingo takes a different approach to pricing. Instead of a fixed cost per image, you dial cost up or down by choosing which of three model tiers to run — Standard, Lite, or Pro. Combine that with the per-credit pricing curve, and Nano Banana ends up with one of the more flexible cost profiles on this list.

Per-credit cost across the four plans:

• Starter monthly — $29.9 ÷ 800 = $0.037/credit
• Starter annual — $19.9 ÷ 800 = $0.025/credit
• Pro annual — $39.9 ÷ 1,600 = $0.025/credit
• Max annual — $69.9 ÷ 4,000 = $0.017/credit
• Ultra annual — $149.9 ÷ 10,000 = $0.015/credit

Because a Standard-tier image consumes fewer credits than a Pro-tier image, the same subscription can produce a very different number of usable outputs depending on how you allocate them. Users who mix quick drafts (Standard) with final renders (Pro) tend to get more mileage per dollar than users who run everything at max quality.

The Ultra plan’s 1×–5× usage multiplier is worth noting — it effectively expands the 10,000-credit ceiling for heavier workloads without moving you to a higher subscription bracket.

Pros

• Three model tiers let you match cost to output quality on a per-generation basis
• Per-credit cost drops from $0.037 to $0.015 as tiers scale
• Annual billing saves 20–33% depending on plan
• Ultra tier’s 1×–5× multiplier extends effective credit ceiling

Cons

• Starter plan does not include commercial licensing
• Credit-per-image count varies by chosen model tier

Best value for: users who mix quick iterations with high-quality finals, and want granular control over cost per generation.

3. Krea AI — Cheapest Paid Entry, Unlimited at the Top

Krea has the lowest paid entry price on this list: $5/mo on annual billing. That gets you 5,000 units, which Krea documents as roughly 64 Nano Banana 2 images or 20 Seedance 2.0 videos.

Effective image cost:

• Basic annual — $60/yr ÷ 768 images = $0.078/image
• Pro annual — $252/yr ÷ 3,072 images = $0.082/image
• Max annual — $756/yr ÷ 9,216 images = $0.082/image on tracked units

But Max’s real value isn’t the tracked units — it’s the unlimited relaxed generations. Once you’re producing more than a few thousand images a month, marginal cost per image drops toward zero. That makes Max the cheapest per-image plan on the list at high volume, even though its headline price is $63/mo.

Krea also runs the deepest annual discount (40%), which is genuinely unusual — most platforms cap annual savings around 20–25%.

Pros

• Lowest paid entry price on this list ($5/mo annual)
• 40% annual discount (deepest of any platform here)
• Unlimited relaxed generations on Max drives marginal cost toward zero
• Transparent unit-to-image conversion published by the platform

Cons

• Free tier limited to single-task image generation, no video concurrency
• Node-based workflow adds a learning curve for prompt-only users

Best value for: heavy users who can commit annually and are willing to work in relaxed mode.

4. Hailuo AI — Cheapest Frontier-Model Access

Hailuo’s cost-effectiveness case is different from the others: you’re not paying the lowest per-image rate, you’re paying the lowest rate for access to frontier models. Veo 3.1, Sora 2, Seedance 2.0, Nano Banana Pro, Seedream 5.0 Lite, GPT Image 2 — all inside one $7.99/mo annual subscription.

Standard-tier image cost math:

• A GPT Image 2 image at 1K/Low = 2 Shells
• Standard annual — $7.99 ÷ (1,000 Shells ÷ 2) = $0.016/image
• Pro annual — $27.99 ÷ (4,500 Shells ÷ 2) = $0.012/image

Pro and above unlock unlimited generation on selected models at set resolutions — Nano Banana at 1K on Pro, at 2K on Master, and other image models up to 4K on Max. That effectively drives marginal cost to zero for the models you use most.

Annual billing saves up to 49% — the largest percentage discount on this list (Krea’s 40% is on smaller absolute numbers).

Pros

• Cheapest single subscription that includes Veo 3.1, Sora 2, and Seedance 2.0
• Up to 49% annual savings
• Unlimited generation on selected models from Pro tier upward
• Watermark removal on every paid plan

Cons

• Shell-based currency adds a mental conversion step
• Free tier is a one-time trial rather than recurring

Best value for: users who want premium video and image models under one bill.

5. getimg.ai — Lowest Per-Credit Rate

getimg.ai’s per-credit pricing is the tightest on this list: $0.0033 on Entry monthly down to $0.0015 on Ultra annual. Combined with a full multi-modal toolkit — image, video, music, speech — that makes it one of the strongest value propositions if you’d otherwise be paying for multiple tools.

Tier math (per credit):

• Entry monthly — $10 ÷ 3,000 = $0.0033
• Entry annual — $96 ÷ 36,000 = $0.0027
• Core annual — $300 ÷ 180,000 = $0.00167
• Ultra annual — $1,800 ÷ 1,200,000 = $0.0015

Actual per-image cost depends on which of the platform’s 11+ image models you use, so budgeting requires a bit of testing. But even at 5× credit consumption per image, effective cost still comes in under $0.02.

Pros

• Lowest per-credit rate on this list ($0.0015 on Ultra annual)
• Multi-modal coverage — one subscription replaces three
• Commercial rights on every paid tier
• 100 free credits to start

Cons

• Effective per-image cost varies by model, complicating exact budgeting
• Entry plan is single-user only

Best value for: small creative teams replacing multiple single-purpose subscriptions.

6. OpenArt — Lowest Headline $/Image

If you look purely at published per-image math, OpenArt wins the headline number. Its 1 credit ≈ 1 image conversion, combined with generous credit allocations, pushes effective cost to $0.0018–$0.0035.

Tier math:

• Essential annual — $151.2/yr ÷ 48,000 credits = $0.00315/image
• Advanced annual — $278.4/yr ÷ 144,000 credits = $0.00193/image
• Infinite annual — $524.4/yr ÷ 288,000 credits = $0.00182/image

That’s an order of magnitude below Chat Image or Nano Banana Bingo. The caveat: those numbers apply to base image generation. Video, premium models, and higher-resolution options consume more credits per output, which pulls the effective average up. Realistic mixed-use per-image cost typically lands in the $0.01–$0.03 range once you factor in the models most people actually pick.

Still, for base image workloads, OpenArt is genuinely cheap per unit.

Pros

• Lowest headline per-image cost on this list ($0.0018 on base images)
• 100+ models accessible from one subscription
• 27% annual discount
• Wonder tier includes unlimited Seedream 5.0 Pro generation

Cons

• Essential plan excludes commercial rights
• Per-seat billing scales up quickly for teams

Best value for: solo creators generating high volumes of base-model images.

7. CGDream — 2D + 3D Under One Bill

CGDream’s cost-effectiveness comes from being one of the few platforms that generates both 2D images and native 3D models at consumer pricing. Text-to-3D and image-to-3D would normally require a separate subscription.

Per-image math at 60 credits per default Flux/Pro 1.1 image:

• Basic — $10 ÷ (10,000 ÷ 60) = $0.06/image
• Pro — $30 ÷ (40,000 ÷ 60) = $0.045/image
• Premium — $60 ÷ (90,000 ÷ 60) = $0.04/image

Credit-to-dollar ratio scales 1× / 4× / 9× across tiers — jumping to Pro effectively quadruples value per dollar, and Premium multiplies by nine. All paid plans advertise “Unlimited Credits per Day” and Relaxed Generations as a fallback.

No public annual discount, which is unusual on this list. If you can only commit monthly, though, CGDream’s tier scaling still delivers.

Pros

• Native 2D + 3D generation under one subscription
• Credit-value ratio scales 1× / 4× / 9× across tiers
• Unlimited Credits per Day advertised on all paid plans
• Inpainting included alongside standard workflows

Cons

• No publicly advertised annual discount
• Basic plan lacks Slow Mode fallback

Best value for: anyone working across 2D and 3D who wants one bill instead of two.

8. EaseMate AI — Bundle Economics

EaseMate’s pricing looks mid-range on image generation alone — around $0.056–$0.098 per image. What tips it toward cost-effective is the bundling: image, video, LLM chat (GPT-5, Claude, Gemini), OCR, PDF chat, translation, and math solvers all in one subscription.

Tier math on default 10-credit images:

• Lite annual — $89.88/yr ÷ 14,400 credits × 10 = $0.062/image
• Pro annual — $202.8/yr ÷ 36,000 credits × 10 = $0.056/image
• Credit packs — $0.098/image (500-pack) down to $0.070/image (15,000-pack, 30% off)

Credit packs never expire, which matters for irregular usage. If you generate 100 images one month and 500 the next, you don’t lose unused allocation.

Renewal pricing is worth watching — first-month/first-year promos step up on renewal.

Pros

• Image + video + chat + productivity in one subscription
• Credit packs never expire
• Access to GPT-5, Claude, Gemini, Midjourney, and Sora 2 under one bill
• 30% discount on largest credit pack

Cons

• Promotional first-cycle pricing steps up on renewal
• Free tier disables OCR and Face Swap

Best value for: solo users consolidating multiple SaaS subscriptions.

9. Envato — Only If You Need the Stock Library

Envato’s AI-generation math looks weak in isolation: $0.39 per generation on Plus annual, at only 100 generations/month. Compared to specialist tools charging $0.02, that’s a 20× premium.

But Envato isn’t sold as a pure AI tool. The $16.50/mo Core plan unlocks 28M+ stock assets with lifetime commercial licenses. The $39/mo Plus plan adds 100 AI generations on top. If you’d otherwise be paying for Envato Elements anyway, the incremental AI cost is $22.50/mo — a much better number.

For unlimited AI, Ultimate at $109/mo eliminates the per-generation cap. At 500 generations/month, effective cost drops to $0.22/image. At 2,000/month, $0.055/image.

The value case only works if the stock library matters. As a standalone AI subscription, it’s the worst deal on this list.

Pros

• Lifetime commercial license on all AI outputs and stock downloads
• 28M+ asset library included alongside AI
• Unlimited AI generation on Ultimate reduces effective per-image cost at volume
• Broad model access (Flux, NanoBanana, Veo, Kling, ElevenLabs, Topaz)

Cons

• Core plan excludes AI generation entirely
• Per-generation cost on Plus is 10–20× higher than specialist tools

Best value for: teams already paying for stock media who want AI in the same bill.

10. Shutterstock AI — Value Only if You Already Need Stock

Shutterstock’s per-AI-credit cost is the highest on this list — $0.58–$1.99 per credit if you attribute the full subscription cost to AI usage. As a standalone AI platform, it’s not competitive.

But like Envato, that’s not really how anyone uses it. The $29/mo annual Unlimited Images plan buys you unlimited downloads from 83M+ premium images and 100M+ videos/music/SFX. The 50 monthly AI credits are a side dish.

If you’re already paying for stock, the AI credits are effectively free at the margin. If you’re not, this is the wrong platform.

Annual billing roughly halves the cost vs. no-contract pricing — the steepest percentage swing on this list, though the base rate is high enough that the savings don’t outweigh specialist tools for pure AI use.

Pros

• Access to Imagen 4 Ultra, Gemini 3.1 Flash, GPT models, and Runway
• 83M+ images and 100M+ mixed-media assets bundled
• Single-user commercial license simplifies rights management
• ~50% savings on annual vs. no-contract billing

Cons

• Standalone AI cost-per-credit is the highest on this list
• 50–100 monthly AI credits is low for AI-first workflows

Best value for: teams already using Shutterstock stock who want light AI supplementation.

Where Your Dollar Goes Furthest

Under $10/mo: Krea Basic annual ($5) and getimg.ai Entry annual ($8) are the cheapest paid entries. Krea has the deeper discount; getimg.ai has the wider tool coverage.

Under $20/mo, single tool: Chat Image Basic annual ($14.9) delivers the most predictable per-image cost. Nano Banana Bingo Starter annual ($19.9) delivers the widest cost-quality range.

Best per-image headline: OpenArt Advanced annual at $0.0019 on base images.

Best per-credit rate: getimg.ai Ultra annual at $0.0015.

Deepest annual discount: Hailuo (49%) and Krea (40%).

Cheapest frontier-model access: Hailuo Standard annual at $7.99/mo.

Best bundle economics: EaseMate (image + video + chat + productivity), Krea (image + video + 3D + workflows), getimg.ai (image + video + music + speech).

Final Thoughts

Cost-effectiveness isn’t a single ranking — it’s a match between your workflow and a pricing model. Someone generating 50 images a month at fixed quality gets the best deal from Chat Image. Someone generating 5,000 mixed-quality images gets the best deal from Krea Max or OpenArt Wonder. Someone who needs Veo 3.1 and Nano Banana in the same subscription gets the best deal from Hailuo.

The math on this list is real, but so is the workflow fit. The cheapest platform in dollars per image isn’t cost-effective if you spend an extra ten hours a month working around it.

Pick two or three that match your actual output pattern, generate the same prompts through each free tier, and calculate cost per usable image — not per credit. That’s the number that matters.