InVideo AI pricing

About

InVideo makes invideo AI, a prompt/text-to-video generator: you type a brief and the product scripts, narrates, sources stock footage and edits a complete video — its v4 “agent” is advertised as creating up to 30 mins of video from a single prompt. It sits alongside the company’s original invideo Studio, a template-based online video editor, and exposes 200+ underlying image/video/audio/music models inside one workspace (Google Veo 3.1, Sora 2, Kling, Nano Banana Pro, Seedream, ElevenLabs and more). InVideo was founded in 2017 (Mumbai/San Francisco) and is widely reported to serve millions of users across 190+ countries; its homepage lists Apple, Google, Microsoft, Walmart, Visa and Disney teams as users.

InVideo monetizes through a freemium subscription layered on a single credit currency. A free watermarked tier funnels into two paid tiers — Plus (reported ~$25/mo) and Max (reported ~$60/mo), each about 20% cheaper billed annually — plus a custom-quoted Enterprise/Team plan. Every tier includes an AI generation-minutes allowance, and a platform-wide credit pool meters generative-model outputs; per InVideo’s FAQ, those generative models bill “at their original API pricing” and unused credits don’t roll over. Company financials (ARR, exact headcount, valuation) are left for further research.

For the most current information on InVideo AI’s pricing and market position, visit InVideo AI.

Pricing summary : How InVideo AI’s pricing model works

InVideo AI runs a freemium + per-seat subscription with a credit currency underneath. You pick a tier — Free, Plus or Max (Enterprise/Team is quoted) — and each tier bundles two metered things: an AI generation-minutes allowance and a pool of credits. Per InVideo’s live pricing FAQ, “credits work like currency on our platform and are used for video creation, generative models and across other features,” generative models are billed “at their original API pricing,” and — stated outright — “unused credits don’t roll over to the next month.”

Prices come with a caveat. InVideo’s pricing page renders its plan table from a client-side API that was erroring on our capture date (“Failed to load pricing information / Network Error / Retry”), and direct fetches hit the same wall. So the prices below are third-party-reported and approximate: Free $0, Plus ~$25/mo (~$20/mo, $240/yr billed annually), Max ~$60/mo ($48/mo, ~$576/yr billed annually), each about 20% cheaper annually. What is confirmed from the live capture is the credit mechanic (currency, original-API generative pricing, no rollover, seat-based, add-on credits when you run out).

What makes this different: InVideo doesn’t mark up each model — it passes generative-model cost through “at their original API pricing” and meters it out of one shared credit pool, then wraps that in tiered minute allowances. It is a credit-based billing layer over a freemium subscription where the watermark, export resolution and commercial-use rights — not just the meter — are the real upgrade levers.

Pricing by product

Sales motions across products: self-serve PLG for Free, Plus and Max — sign up, generate, pay by card per seat with credits metering generative output — and sales-led for Enterprise/Team (seats, higher allowances, support). All advertised exact prices above are third-party-reported because InVideo’s pricing API failed to load on capture; the credit/no-rollover/original-API mechanics are from the live capture FAQ.

Hidden costs : What InVideo AI users actually pay

The sticker price is the tier fee, but the numbers that actually move an InVideo bill are the generation-minutes allowance, the credit pool, and the fact that credits don’t roll over. Two costs hide inside the model. First, generative models bill “at their original API pricing” — so a single Veo 3.1 or Sora 2 generation can burn credits far faster than a basic stock-footage edit, and your effective rate depends entirely on which model you call. Second, the free tier’s real cost is the watermark plus 720p export cap plus personal-use-only license: you cannot ship a commercial, watermark-free video without paying.

Effective $-per-minute (computed from reported figures, NOT posted by InVideo): dividing the reported annual price by the reported monthly minutes allowance gives a rough floor cost before any à-la-carte credit top-ups.

The lesson: Max is dramatically cheaper per minute (~$0.24 vs ~$0.40) once you actually generate volume — the per-minute economics, not the headline price, are what justify the upgrade. But because unused credits/minutes are forfeited monthly, a light month on Max wastes most of the allowance, so the per-minute math only holds if you generate near the cap.

Want to estimate your own InVideo AI bill? Use the InVideo AI pricing calculator to model your cost across tiers, generation minutes and credit usage.

Pricing evolution : InVideo AI pricing history and changes

Cadence

Tracked range: 2017–present. InVideo’s pricing page loads plans via an API that errored on the 2026-06-11 capture, so current price points are third-party-reported; the timeline anchors on the 2023 invideo AI / credit-model launch and the live 2026-06-11 FAQ capture.

Notable changes

• 2017 — InVideo launches as invideo Studio, a template-based online video editor on a conventional subscription — no AI generation, no credit currency.
• 2023 — Launch of invideo AI (text/prompt-to-video), introducing the platform-wide credit currency that meters AI generation and generative-model outputs alongside the subscription tiers.
• 2026 Q2 — Current shape: Free / Plus ~$25/mo / Max ~$60/mo (~20% off annual), a v4 “agent” advertised at up to 30 mins of video per prompt, 200+ underlying models, generative output billed “at their original API pricing,” and an explicit no-credit-rollover policy (all per the live FAQ; prices second-sourced).

What’s unique : InVideo AI’s distinctive pricing mechanics

1. Pass-through “original API pricing” for generative models.

Rather than re-pricing each model with its own markup, InVideo states generative models bill “at their original API pricing” and draws that cost from your shared credit pool. The platform acts as an aggregator that exposes 200+ models (Veo 3.1, Sora 2, Kling, Nano Banana Pro, ElevenLabs) at their underlying rate — so your effective cost depends on which model you call, not a flat InVideo per-output price.

2. One credit currency spanning video, image, audio and music.

Credits “work like currency on our platform” across every modality and feature, not just video. That single internal unit lets InVideo re-price model costs continuously (“we reserve the right to update credit costs at any time”) without renaming a plan — a textbook credit-based billing abstraction over a multi-model catalog.

3. Two meters in one plan: minutes allowance + credits.

Each tier bundles an AI generation-minutes allowance and a credit pool. Minutes gate how much you can generate; credits gate the cost of which models you use to generate it. It’s a seat-plus-usage hybrid where two distinct consumption axes sit inside one subscription tier.

4. The watermark, resolution and license are the real paywall.

Unlike pure usage tools, InVideo’s strongest upgrade lever is non-metered: the Free tier’s watermark, 720p cap and personal-use-only license. Paying for Plus is often less about more minutes and more about a clean, 1080p, commercially-licensed export — a packaging lever as powerful as the meter.

Strengths & weaknesses

Billing UX : InVideo AI billing controls and transparency

• Billing controls — Self-serve card signup for Free, Plus and Max; Enterprise/Team routes to “contact sales.” A monthly-vs-annual choice (~20% off annual) is the main lever, and seats are defined per the FAQ for team plans.
• Usage visibility — Two meters to watch: the AI generation-minutes allowance and the credit pool. The FAQ confirms credits are charged per generation, that generative models cost differently (at original API pricing), and that running out routes you to add-on credit purchases — so a low-credit balance is the key signal to monitor.
• Transparency caveat — Prices are rendered client-side from an API that can fail to load (it returned “Failed to load pricing information / Network Error” on our capture). When that happens, a prospect sees tiers and FAQs but no numbers — a real transparency gap versus a static price table.
• Payment options — The FAQ has a dedicated “What payments do you support?” entry; standard card billing for self-serve tiers, with invoicing handled in the Enterprise/Team sales motion.

Strategic wins : Why InVideo AI’s pricing decisions worked

1. Aggregating 200+ models at pass-through cost.

By billing generative models “at their original API pricing” out of one credit pool, InVideo positions itself as a neutral aggregator rather than a marked-up reseller — letting it add new models (Veo, Sora, Kling) without re-papering plans. See how AI companies structure pricing.

2. Packaging the watermark/license as the paywall.

The free tier is genuinely usable for trying the product, but the watermark, 720p cap and personal-use license make any real deliverable require Plus — a packaging move that converts curious users without hard-capping the experience. Related: choosing the right usage metric.

3. One credit currency it can reprice on demand.

Metering everything in abstract credits — and reserving the right to “update credit costs at any time” — lets InVideo absorb shifts in underlying model cost without touching the plan grid, a structural advantage for a GPU-cost-exposed aggregator. See outcome-based pricing trends.

Areas to improve : Gaps in InVideo AI’s pricing approach

1. The price table itself can fail to load.

Rendering plans from a client-side API means a network or API hiccup leaves prospects staring at “Failed to load pricing information.” A static, server-rendered fallback price table would prevent the worst-case transparency failure. See bill shock and cost unpredictability.

2. Per-model credit cost is hard to predict before you generate.

Because generative output bills at each model’s original API price out of a shared pool, a buyer can’t easily forecast how far a credit balance goes — a published “this model costs roughly N credits per output” table would reduce the guesswork.

3. No-rollover punishes bursty creators.

Forfeiting unused minutes and credits each month penalizes the lumpy, project-based workflows creators actually have. A small rollover cap or a “credits expiring soon” nudge (thresholding/alerting) would soften the all-or-nothing reset.

Key takeaways

1. Pass-through model pricing is a positioning win for aggregators. Billing generative output “at original API pricing” lets InVideo add models without markup accusations or plan rewrites.
2. One credit currency decouples plan names from model cost. Metering everything in credits — and reserving the right to reprice them — absorbs GPU-cost shifts without touching the published tiers.
3. The watermark and license can be a stronger paywall than the meter. InVideo converts on watermark-free, higher-res, commercially-licensed exports as much as on more minutes.
4. Two meters (minutes + credits) add predictability risk. Buyers must track both a minutes allowance and a credit pool whose burn rate depends on which model they call.
5. API-rendered prices are a transparency liability. When the pricing API fails, prospects see no numbers at all — a static fallback would protect the funnel.

UBP implications

1. Aggregators can meter in one credit currency while passing model cost through at API price. This keeps the value metric simple for buyers while preserving the ability to reprice the cost-of-goods layer continuously. See usage-based pricing strategy.
2. Non-metered packaging levers (watermark, resolution, license) can drive conversion as hard as usage caps. UBP practitioners shouldn’t assume the meter is the only — or best — paywall.
3. No-rollover credits are a use-it-or-lose-it consumption gate inside a subscription. They behave like usage pricing for heavy users and like a flat plan for light ones — relevant for anyone blending freemium with metered AI output.

Sources

• InVideo AI pricing page (accessed 2026-06-11) — official; plan table rendered via an API that returned “Failed to load pricing information / Network Error”; FAQ (credits, no rollover, original-API pricing, seats) captured
• InVideo AI product page (accessed 2026-06-11) — “200+ models”, v4 agent “up to 30 mins of video from a single prompt”
• InVideo pricing 2026 — Free vs Plus vs Max (Flowith) (accessed 2026-06-11) — Free $0, Plus $25 ($20 annual), Max $60 ($48 annual); watermark/voiceover caps
• InVideo AI pricing plans 2026 (MyMarky) (accessed 2026-06-11) — Plus $25 ($240/yr), Max $60 ($576/yr); minutes & commercial-use detail
• InVideo AI pricing (Costbench) (accessed 2026-06-11) — multi-tier ladder incl. Team; median buyer ~$255/yr

Bottom line

InVideo AI prices a prompt-to-video generator as freemium plus subscription over a single credit currency: a free but watermarked tier, Plus at roughly $25/month and Max at roughly $60/month (each about 20% cheaper billed annually), with generative-model outputs billed “at their original API pricing” out of a shared credit pool that doesn’t roll over. Its sharpest design choice is acting as a pass-through aggregator of 200+ models rather than marking each one up — and its sharpest liability is that the price table loads from an API that can fail outright, leaving prospects with tiers and FAQs but no numbers (as happened on our capture, which is why the prices here are third-party-reported). The real paywall is as much the watermark, resolution and commercial license as the meter. Browse the pricing blueprint for more fully-researched company profiles.

Want to compare InVideo AI against other generative-media and AI-platform companies? Browse the pricing blueprint.

Pricing timeline : Major events on a vertical axis

Each milestone below corresponds to a public pricing change, product launch, or material adjustment. Major events use a filled marker; minor adjustments use a faded one.

Free / Plus (~$25/mo) / Max (~$60/mo) credit-metered tiers

Jun 2026

Current shape (third-party-reported, prices not in live capture): Free $0 (watermarked, 720p, ~10 min/week), Plus ~$25/mo (~$20 annual, no watermark, 1080p, ~50 min/mo, commercial license + iStock), Max ~$60/mo (~$48 annual, 4K, ~200 min/mo). A single credit currency meters generative-model outputs at each model's original API price; unused credits don't roll over. InVideo's pricing page loads plans via an API that returned 'Failed to load pricing information / Network Error' on capture day, so prices are second-sourced.

Launches invideo AI (text-to-video) on a credit model

Sep 2023

InVideo, founded 2017 as a template-based online video editor (invideo Studio), launched 'invideo AI' — a text/prompt-to-video generator that scripts, narrates and edits a full video from a single prompt. It introduced the platform-wide credit currency that meters AI generation and generative-model outputs, alongside the existing subscription tiers.