A new survey of over 1,000 side hustlers found that people using AI tools bring in a median of $500 a month from their side hustle, compared to $250 a month for people not using AI. That is a clean doubling at the median, and even on average income, AI users still came out well ahead at $555 a month versus $333. A third of AI users said they probably or definitely would not have started their side hustle at all without AI tools helping them get going.
That is a real, sizable gap, and it lines up with a separate, better documented survey of freelancers from Upwork, which found AI-using freelancers earn 34% more per hour than those who do not use it, with AI-augmented professional services work up 72% year over year. Two independent surveys pointing the same direction is worth paying attention to if you are thinking about starting or growing a side income.
But the full picture is more interesting, and more useful, than just “AI equals more money.” This article walks through what the data actually says, including a genuinely important nuance buried in the Upwork numbers that most coverage of this topic skips entirely: not all AI-assisted work pays more, and some of it is getting cheaper fast.
Key Takeaways
- A survey of 1,007 side hustlers found AI users earning a median $500 a month versus $250 for non-AI users, with a third saying they would not have started without AI
- Upwork’s Future Workforce Index, based on 2,400 freelancers plus platform data, found AI-using freelancers earn 34% more per hour, but that average hides a split: complex AI-assisted work pays 45% more year over year, while simple AI execution work pays 28% less
- Freelance writing work specifically has contracted sharply since ChatGPT launched, down roughly 30% in postings by some measures, showing AI has genuinely commoditized certain categories even as it enables others
- The clearest, most repeatable tools behind these gains are ordinary and already familiar: ChatGPT for writing and research, Canva for social content and design, not exotic or hard to access software
- The honest read on the income gap is correlation more than proven causation, since people who adopt AI tools for a side hustle are likely already more resourced or motivated than people who do not
The numbers behind the “double” claim
The side hustler survey, cited by Inc.com and attributed to Network Solutions, surveyed 1,007 people currently running a side hustle. Worth being upfront about a limitation here: neither Inc.com’s writeup nor anything else available names the survey’s fielding dates, panel provider, or margin of error, so treat the exact figures as directionally solid but not laboratory precise.
With that caveat, the headline numbers are the median monthly income of $500 for AI users against $250 for non-AI users, a clean 2x gap, alongside average income of $555 versus $333, a smaller but still substantial 1.67x gap. AI users also reported saving about 9 hours a week through automation, and 40% said their results came faster than expected, compared to 30% of non-AI users. The most commonly automated tasks were writing, social media content, logo and branding work, and market research, which lines up with what most people already associate with tools like ChatGPT and Canva.
One detail worth calling out: Baby Boomers were the fastest generation to get their side hustle operational, with 47% up and running within four weeks, ahead of Gen Z at 40%, Millennials at 37%, and Gen X at 35%. That cuts against the assumption that only younger, more tech-native people benefit from AI tools.
The stronger, better documented data point
Upwork’s Future Workforce Index, based on a survey of 2,400 U.S. knowledge workers combined with an analysis of Upwork’s own marketplace data, is a more rigorously documented source, and it backs up the general direction of the side hustler survey. Freelancers doing AI-related work earn 34% more per hour than those who do not, skilled freelancing grew from 28% to 38% of the workforce in a year, and AI-augmented professional services work grew 72% in volume with earnings up 22%.
Here is the part worth slowing down for. That 34% average premium is not evenly distributed. Complex AI-assisted work, the kind where someone applies real judgment, expertise, and business context on top of an AI tool, saw earnings rise 45% year over year. Pure AI execution work, the simple, repeatable button-pushing kind, saw earnings fall 28% year over year. Generative AI creative production saw contract volume jump 90%, but per-contract earnings actually dropped 13%, meaning more people are doing that kind of work for less money each. As Stanford economist Nick Bloom put it in the report, the value from AI work “is not showing up evenly, it is concentrated in more complex work where people are applying expertise, judgment, and business context on top of AI.”
That single contrast, complex AI-assisted work up 45% while simple AI execution work is down 28%, is a much more honest and useful takeaway than “use AI, make more money.” It suggests the income gap in these surveys is not really about having access to AI. Almost everyone has access to ChatGPT and Canva at this point. It is about what you do with it.
What the freelance writing market shows about the other side of this
If you want evidence that AI genuinely commoditizes certain kinds of work, freelance writing is the clearest example available. Academic analysis of roughly 2 million job postings by researchers at Imperial College London, Harvard Business School, and the German Institute for Economic Research found that writing job postings fell 30% within eight months of ChatGPT’s public launch, the steepest decline of any freelance category studied. A separate analysis of Upwork’s marketplace found writing category projects down 32% year over year in 2025, again the largest drop of any category tracked, and entry level project availability across freelance platforms fell from about 15% to under 9%.
This is not a contradiction of the income data above. It is the same story from a different angle. Generic, commoditized writing work got cheaper and scarcer because AI can now do a passable version of it directly. The people earning more with AI are the ones doing something AI cannot fully replace on its own: applying judgment, strategy, or a specific point of view on top of the tool, not just using the tool to produce generic output.
The tools actually behind this, and where the real evidence runs out
If you strip away the hype, the tools most consistently named across every source in this research are unglamorous and already familiar. ChatGPT shows up repeatedly for writing, research, and drafting. Canva, including its AI-assisted design features, shows up repeatedly for social content, thumbnails, and print on demand graphics. Neither requires specialized access or a steep learning curve, which is itself worth noting: the barrier to trying this is genuinely low.
Beyond those two, the specific dollar figures floating around for niches like AI-assisted print on demand or AI chatbot services come from individual bloggers and practitioner accounts rather than surveys or studies, and should be read as one person’s experience rather than a general pattern. That does not make them worthless, but it does mean you should treat a claim like “print on demand sellers make $5,000 a month after a year” as an anecdote, not a benchmark.
The honest caveat worth sitting with
The most important thing missing from most coverage of this survey is a basic statistical point: correlation is not causation. People who adopt AI tools to run a side hustle are likely already somewhat more resourced, more comfortable with technology, or more motivated to make their side hustle work than people who have not adopted AI at all. The survey shows AI users earning more, it does not prove that picking up ChatGPT is what caused the income difference on its own.
There is also a real saturation concern baked into the same survey: 45% of AI users said they worry AI makes it easier for competitors to copy their work, rising to 52% among people selling digital products and 50% among content creators. If the tools that helped you get started are equally available to everyone else trying the same thing, the advantage from simply having AI access shrinks over time, which is consistent with the Upwork data showing simple AI execution work getting cheaper even as complex AI-assisted work gets more valuable.
Put together, the realistic conclusion is not “AI side hustles print money.” It is closer to this: AI has lowered the cost of getting started on a side hustle enough that more people are trying, and the income gap shows up most clearly for the people using AI to do something with actual judgment or a point of view behind it, not just to automate the most generic, easily copied version of the work. That is a less exciting headline than “double the income,” but it is the one the data actually supports, and it is far more useful if you are deciding where to put your own time.
Rich mode — activated. — Nini
Curious what the next data-backed AI income breakdown turns up? The newsletter is where I share those first.
Leave a Reply