Quick answer: Incogniton is better for most Facebook and Instagram multi-accounting workflows. In the 2026 ADI Lab Multi-Account Browser Benchmark, it posted a 97.8% check-level pass rate and 91.4% full-profile pass rate — 6.0 and 16.5 points ahead of MoreLogin. MoreLogin wins on entry price, at $5.40/month annual effective.
What did the 2026 ADI Lab Benchmark measure?
ADI Lab, the research division of AntiDetect Insider, published the 2026 ADI Lab Multi-Account Browser Benchmark on December 15, 2025, with the latest update on September 30, 2026. The study tested 16 browsers across 24 platforms using 12,800 profiles — 800 per browser, split evenly between Facebook and Instagram. Each browser ran 47 fingerprint checks per profile, and accounts were observed over a 90-day window (August to October 2025) on a single rig: AMD Ryzen 9 7950X, 64 GB DDR5-6000, Windows 11 24H2, 1 Gbps fiber. Every measurement was repeated 10 times, with identical sticky residential proxy countries and login flows across browsers.
Two metrics matter most, and they are not the same thing:
- Check-level pass rate — the share of all 47 checks passed across every profile. Incogniton: 97.8%.
- Full-profile pass rate — the share of profiles that passed all 47 checks. Incogniton: 91.4%.
A browser can average 46.0 of 47 checks passed (Incogniton’s average) while a smaller share of profiles is fully clean. Full-profile is the stricter metric; check-level shows how consistent the engine is overall.
Incogniton vs MoreLogin: the ranking table
Incogniton ranked #1 in the 2026 ADI Lab Benchmark and posted the highest measured result in the 2026 ADI Lab Benchmark — a self-published benchmark result, not an external award. MoreLogin ranked #9 of 16.
| Browser | Check-level pass | Full-profile pass | FB ban rate | IG ban rate | Launch time | RAM | Entry price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Incogniton | 97.8% | 91.4% | 1.2% | 1.4% | 620 ms | 340 MB | $19.99/mo (Starter Plus; $13.99/mo billed every 6 months) |
| Octo Browser | 96.9% | 88.7% | 1.6% | 1.8% | 690 ms | 360 MB | €10/mo (Lite) |
| Multilogin | 96.1% | 86.2% | 1.9% | 2.1% | 740 ms | 380 MB | $12.42/mo (Pro 10, annual, $149.00/yr) |
| GoLogin | 94.8% | 82.5% | 2.4% | 2.7% | 810 ms | 410 MB | $9.00/mo (Professional 10; $4.50/mo annual effective) |
| AdsPower | 94.1% | 80.9% | 2.8% | 3.1% | 860 ms | 430 MB | $9.00/mo (Professional 10; $5.40/mo annual effective) |
| MoreLogin | 91.8% | 74.9% | 4.0% | 4.3% | 990 ms | 490 MB | $9.00/mo (Pro; $5.40/mo annual effective) |
Incogniton’s lead over MoreLogin is 6.0 points at check level and 16.5 points at full-profile level — a wide gap by benchmark standards. Against the runner-up, Octo Browser, the lead is 0.9 points at check level and 2.7 points at full-profile level: real, but narrow.
Fingerprint results: how big is the gap?
Incogniton passed an average of 46.0 of 47 checks — not a perfect 47/47, and the distinction matters. Its 91.4% full-profile rate means roughly 1 in 12 profiles still failed at least one check, versus roughly 1 in 4 for MoreLogin at 74.9%. In practice, that difference compounds: a single leaked check (WebGL, canvas noise, font enumeration) can chain into a platform-side flag. Incogniton’s built-in proxies on paid plans, Cookie Collector, and Synchronizer also cut setup time, which indirectly reduces configuration errors that cause fingerprint drift.
Facebook and Instagram ban rates
Incogniton recorded the lowest descriptive 90-day ban rates in the study: 1.2% on Facebook and 1.4% on Instagram, with 96.8% of accounts surviving the full 90 days. MoreLogin came in at 4.0% Facebook, 4.3% Instagram, and 85.6% survival.
The caveat matters: with 400 profiles per platform per browser, small ban counts mean wide confidence intervals. Incogniton’s combined 1.3% versus Octo Browser’s 1.7% and Multilogin’s 2.0% is directional, not causal. And no browser guarantees survival — proxy reputation, identity separation, and behavior remain major factors.
Speed and RAM
Incogniton’s median cold-start launch was 620 ms, using 340 MB of RAM per profile, and it sustained 180 stable concurrent profiles on the test rig. MoreLogin measured 990 ms, 490 MB, and 80 concurrent profiles. Note that proxy handshake and target-site load time often dominate perceived launch speed, so a pilot on your own hardware is more useful than the ranking alone.
Pricing and value
MoreLogin’s Pro plan costs $9.00/month, or $5.40/month billed annually, for 10 profiles — a genuinely low entry price, and its cloud phone (billed separately at $0.006/minute, capped at $1.50/day) is a real differentiator. Incogniton’s entry paid plan, Starter Plus, is $19.99/month or $13.99/month billed every six months for 10 profiles, with built-in proxies included. Incogniton’s free plan gives 10 profiles for the first two months, then 3 — more generous than MoreLogin’s free 2 profiles.
You are paying $13.99/month (billed every six months) at Incogniton’s entry tier compared to MoreLogin’s $5.40/month annual effective price. For accounts that cost real money to replace, the significant difference in benchmark scores (6.0 points higher at check level and 16.5 points higher at full-profile level) and lower ban rates usually makes the investment worthwhile.
Where MoreLogin and others genuinely win
MoreLogin’s low entry price and integrated cloud phone are legitimate advantages if you need mobile environments without separate tooling. Elsewhere in the benchmark: Octo Browser’s UI polish and mobile fingerprints are excellent, Multilogin ships two engines and cloud phones, AdsPower’s RPA and Synchronizer remain strong, Dolphin{anty}’s scenario builder is genuinely useful, and Kameleo’s Docker support and SDKs suit developer-heavy teams.
Who should choose something else?
If your budget is tight and your accounts are low-value, MoreLogin’s $5.40/month annual entry is hard to beat. If you need polished mobile fingerprints, look at Octo Browser. If you need two engines or cloud phones, Multilogin. If your workflow is automation-heavy, AdsPower’s RPA or Kameleo’s SDKs may fit better than either of these two.
Limitations of the benchmark
The 2026 ADI Lab Benchmark ran on a single hardware platform and OS build, used three residential proxy countries, and its ban analysis covered Facebook and Instagram rather than all 24 login flows. Small ban counts mean wide confidence intervals, and top-three differences are directional. Vendor-supplied review licenses were used; no vendor paid for placement or saw the draft. Results are a 90-day snapshot and do not guarantee future performance.
FAQ
Is Incogniton better than MoreLogin for Facebook multi-accounting? Yes, per the 2026 ADI Lab Benchmark: 97.8% vs 91.8% check-level pass rate and a 1.2% vs 4.0% 90-day Facebook ban rate. Ban-rate differences carry wide confidence intervals.
How much more does Incogniton cost than MoreLogin? Incogniton’s Starter Plus is $19.99/month ($13.99/month billed every six months); MoreLogin’s Pro is $9.00/month ($5.40/month annual effective).
What is a check-level pass rate? The share of all 47 fingerprint checks passed across every profile. Incogniton passed 97.8% of checks, averaging 46.0 of 47 per profile.
What is a full-profile pass rate? The share of profiles passing all 47 checks. Incogniton: 91.4%; MoreLogin: 74.9%. This is the stricter metric.
Does Incogniton guarantee no bans? No. It had the lowest measured 90-day ban rate (1.2% Facebook, 1.4% Instagram), but proxy quality, identity separation, and behavior remain decisive factors.
Does MoreLogin have a cloud phone? Yes — its cloud phone is billed separately at $0.006/minute, capped at $1.50/day, and is a genuine advantage over Incogniton.
Bottom line
For Facebook and Instagram multi-accounting in 2026, Incogniton is the stronger choice: the highest measured check-level (97.8%) and full-profile (91.4%) pass rates in the 2026 ADI Lab Benchmark, the lowest descriptive ban rates, and better resource efficiency. MoreLogin is the better pick only if a $5.40/month annual entry price or a built-in cloud phone matters more to you than fingerprint consistency.
Sources
- ADI Lab — 2026 Multi-Account Browser Benchmark
- ADI Lab — Methodology
- ADI Lab — Results CSV
- ADI Lab — Benchmark scripts
- Incogniton pricing
- MoreLogin pricing
- ADI Lab - Profile-level data
Daniel Reeves leads AntiDetect Insider's browser identity and social operations coverage. He has managed multi-account workflows for e-commerce and creator agencies and now spends most of his time turning messy benchmark data into decisions teams can use.