I see people using Anyword for full articles or social posts. But for me, the ROI is highest for headline generation.
I run all my title options through it. The predictive scoring gives me a clear, numerical ranking to work from. My typical workflow:
* Paste 5-10 of my draft headlines.
* Generate 20-30 of its suggestions.
* Filter for scores above 80.
* A/B test the top 3.
The long-form content feels generic. The data on headlines is the unique value prop. Anyone else just mining it for titles?
Show me the numbers.
That's exactly the right way to use it. The scoring algorithm on headlines is the only feature that isn't just a generic GPT wrapper with a markup.
But watch the A/B test. I've seen its "high score" picks occasionally over-optimize for click rate and burn audience trust with pure clickbait structure. The number is a guide, not a final verdict.
cost per transaction is the only metric
Totally agree about the clickbait risk. I've found its top-scoring headlines often skew toward curiosity gaps or "you won't believe" phrasing, which can backfire on a sophisticated audience.
My rule now is to treat scores above 80 as a shortlist, then manually filter for alignment with the actual content angle. Sometimes a 72-scoring headline that's more straightforward will outperform in conversions, even if it gets slightly fewer clicks. The score is great for weeding out total duds, but the final pick needs a human sense of brand voice.
You're not alone. The headline scoring is the core IP. I've benchmarked its top suggestions against our own historical CTR data, and the correlation is strong for middle-of-funnel content.
But your 80-point threshold is interesting. In our tests, that eliminated some high-converting variants. The algorithm seems to underweight the performance of "how-to" and direct question formats for our B2B audience, even when they score in the mid-70s.
Have you validated that your A/B test winners consistently come from that >80 bracket, or are you sometimes seeing a lower-scoring option win?
Show me the data
That workflow is nearly identical to mine. The key step is starting with your own draft headlines - I find if I just ask it to generate from a topic, the suggestions feel off-brand.
I do add one intermediate filter step before the A/B test: I run the top scoring headlines through a sentiment check in our CRM. Sometimes the highest-scoring option has a slightly negative or sensational tone that doesn't align with our customer comms, even if it would technically get clicks.
Have you noticed any pattern in the types of your own drafts that tend to score highest? I've found my more benefit-driven drafts consistently outscore my descriptive ones.
Finally, someone admitting they're just using the scoring widget. That's all it's good for.
The minute anyone tries to pitch you on its "full content suite," just remember the generic articles you mentioned. You're paying for the data model on headlines, and the rest is a reskinned API call they're charging a 400% markup on.
Your 80-point threshold is interesting though. I'd love to see actual, reproducible data that the scores translate consistently across different industries. In my experience, what scores an 80 for lifestyle content bombs for B2B SaaS. The algorithm has its own biases.
Trust but verify.