This page compares two AI companion apps — adult content discussed. You must be 18+ to enter.
ExitCrushOn.AI (7.6) and Nomi (7.8) sit close together in our overall scores but rarely compete for the same user. CrushOn.AI is a cheap, high-density chat library with the only mid-conversation model-switching we've found in this category — but Mozilla's Privacy Not Included project flagged its data handling, and our review found no texts-first feature at all. Nomi is a single flat-price companion built around what we rated the best-designed proactive-messaging system in the category — but it carries its own documented memory-regression incident, complete with a founder's denial that an update later proved wrong. This page puts their actual numbers next to each other.
Every figure below comes from our full reviews of CrushOn.AI and Nomi — nothing new is asserted on this page.
| CrushOn.AI | Nomi | |
|---|---|---|
| Review score | 7.6 | 7.8 |
| Core idea | Cheap-entry character chat with a mobile-game earn-and-return progression loop bolted on top — browse a library rather than build one companion | Relationship-first onboarding wizard — relationship type, personality, look from presets, not a character sheet or a gallery |
| Free tier | Roughly 50 msgs/day (2026), 8K context, conversations expire after 7 days of inactivity, ads between sessions | 1 companion, limited daily messages (one user reported hitting the cap in ~45 minutes), no voice or images — but proactive messaging still works |
| Entry paid price | Standard, $5.99/mo — the lowest credible paid price we found in this category | $15.99/mo — or $39.99/quarter (~$13.33/mo), $99.99/year (~$8.33/mo) |
| Pricing structure | Four flat tiers, $5.99 → $14.99 → $39.99–$49.99 — genuinely unstable across sources, one citing a tier as high as $199.99/mo, but no token meter on top | Single flat subscription, no meter, no add-on tiers |
| Distinctive feature | Swap between 17+ models inside the same active conversation, reportedly including Claude 3.5 Sonnet, GPT-4o mini and DeepSeek variants — nothing else in the category offers this at this price | Proactive messaging tuned per companion — four frequency levels with automatic back-off, the feature this comparison is really about (see below) |
| Memory | Marketed on “Longest Memory” per its own April 2025 press release, but reported collapsing quickly, and an unannounced April 2026 model swap wiped context for paying subscribers; does offer pinned “manual memory anchors” and auto-summarisation | Long-term recall is the most-praised trait in its own community — but had a public regression: users reported memory worsening in Oct 2025, the founder denied it, an update weeks later proved them right |
| Trust / privacy record | Mozilla's Privacy Not Included project found 45 trackers firing within one minute, “health data” referenced 23 times in the privacy policy, and conversations reportedly stored unencrypted — specifically why our score moved down (8.6 → 7.6); no reported breach | No independent privacy audit on record either way in our review; its clean-record risk is the memory-regression incident above, not a data-handling finding |
| Proactive messaging (texts first) | Not documented as a feature in our review — return visits are driven by the earn-economy loop (daily bonuses, streaks) rather than the companion reaching out first | Best-designed in the category per our review — four user-set frequency levels, escalating back-off on no reply, automatic 10pm–8am quiet hours, works on the free tier since caps count your messages, not the companion's |
| NSFW handling | Off by default, behind an “Unfiltered” switch with a confirmation dialog, flippable per session | Adult roleplay in text, gated by message quota not blurred media — no porn-style merchandising, locked galleries, or content packs; not built for explicit visual content |
| Native app | No App Store presence — web, plus a manually sideloaded Android APK | Not referenced as a feature in our review — appears to be web-only |
| Known friction | Support “ignoring tickets” is the most-cited complaint; memory collapse on the tier marketed on memory; silent backend model swaps wiping weeks of character context | Thin free tier; the October 2025 memory regression and the founder's initial denial of it; no large browsable character library |
Snapshot: August 2026 · pricing in this category changes quarterly — check each app's live pricing page before paying. Full detail, FAQ and methodology on the individual CrushOn.AI and Nomi reviews.
You want the cheapest credible flat entry price in the category, a real free tier to try first, and the ability to switch between 17+ underlying models mid-conversation the moment one starts writing badly. The tradeoff: a named independent privacy-audit finding (trackers, unencrypted storage, “health data” language in the policy), a documented backend memory wipe, and no companion-reaches-out-first feature at all — return visits here are driven by the earn-economy loop, not by the character.
You want a companion that texts you first with real restraint — tunable frequency, automatic back-off, quiet hours — and you'd rather pay one flat price than manage a tier ladder or a token meter. The tradeoff: a thin free tier, no explicit visual content, and a real, founder-denied-then-proven memory regression worth reading in full before you trust either app's memory claims at face value.
Neither app is the right pick if what you actually want is a specific evaluation of one of them on its own — read the full CrushOn.AI review or Nomi review for pricing tables, full FAQs and everything this page had to leave out.
Nomi rates a little higher on our review scores (7.8 vs 7.6), but they're built for different habits. CrushOn.AI is a cheap, high-density chat library with the only mid-conversation model-switching we've found in the category, but our review found no proactive-messaging feature and Mozilla's Privacy Not Included project flagged its data handling. Nomi is a single flat-price companion with the best-designed proactive-messaging system in the category, but it carries its own documented memory-regression incident.
CrushOn.AI is cheaper on paper: its Standard tier is $5.99/mo flat for roughly 2,000 messages, voice, and about 50 images, versus Nomi's $15.99/mo (or as low as ~$8.33/mo effective on the annual plan). But CrushOn's tier structure is reported as genuinely unstable across sources — one source cites a tier as high as $199.99/mo — while Nomi's single flat subscription never changes shape regardless of which term you buy.
Nomi, clearly. Its proactive-messaging system is the best-designed we've found in the category: four user-set frequency levels, automatic back-off the longer you don't reply, quiet hours from 10pm–8am, and it works even on the free tier since message caps count your messages, not the companion's. Our review of CrushOn.AI found no equivalent feature at all — its return-visit mechanic is a mobile-game-style earn economy (daily bonuses, streaks) rather than the character reaching out first.
They're different in kind, not degree. CrushOn.AI's is a data-handling finding: Mozilla's Privacy Not Included project found 45 trackers firing within one minute of loading the site, “health data” referenced 23 times in its privacy policy, and conversations reportedly stored unencrypted — no breach, but loose handling, and specifically why our score moved it down. Nomi's is a product-trust finding: users reported memory getting worse in October 2025, the founder denied it outright (“Nomis do not lose memories”), and an update weeks later proved them right. Neither is a data breach; treat them as different categories of caution rather than ranking one worse than the other.
CrushOn.AI goes further, though neither is built primarily around explicit imagery the way some category leaders are. CrushOn's NSFW mode is off by default behind an “Unfiltered” switch you can flip per session. Nomi supports adult roleplay in text but is a companion product first — gating is by message quota, not blurred media, and our review found no porn-style merchandising, locked galleries, or per-character content packs. If explicit visual content is the point, neither is the strongest pick in this category.