Quick answer: For media buyers who live in scenario automation, Dolphin{anty} is the better fit in 2026 — its scenario builder, bulk fingerprint changes, and per-user pricing beat Multilogin’s heavier infrastructure. But on raw fingerprint consistency, Multilogin is ahead: 96.1% check-level vs 93.7% and 86.2% vs 79.8% full-profile in the 2026 ADI Lab Benchmark. The right pick depends on whether automation workflow or fingerprint margin matters more to you.
What did the 2026 ADI Lab Benchmark measure?
The 2026 ADI Lab Multi-Account Browser Benchmark is the most complete self-published dataset we have on anti-detect browser consistency. ADI Lab, the research division of AntiDetect Insider, tested 16 browsers with 800 profiles each — 12,800 profiles in total — split evenly between Facebook and Instagram, across 24 supported platforms and 47 fingerprint checks. Each browser ran 16 waves of 50 profiles using the same three sticky residential proxy countries and the same 24 login flows, with every measurement repeated 10 times. Ban outcomes were tracked over a 90-day window from August to October 2025 on a single test rig (AMD Ryzen 9 7950X, 64 GB DDR5-6000, Windows 11 24H2).
The benchmark was last updated 2026-09-30. It is self-published and reader-supported; no vendor paid for placement or saw the draft.
Head-to-head table
| 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 | $13.99/mo (six-month effective; $19.99 monthly) |
| Octo Browser | 96.9% | 88.7% | 1.6% | 1.8% | 690 ms | 360 MB | €10/mo (Lite, 3 profiles) |
| Multilogin | 96.1% | 86.2% | 1.9% | 2.1% | 740 ms | 380 MB | $12.42/mo (Pro 10, annual, $149.00/year) |
| Kameleo | 95.2% | 83.1% | 2.2% | 2.5% | 780 ms | 400 MB | €45/mo annual effective (Startup) |
| GoLogin | 94.8% | 82.5% | 2.4% | 2.7% | 810 ms | 410 MB | $4.50/mo annual effective ($9.00 monthly) |
| AdsPower | 94.1% | 80.9% | 2.8% | 3.1% | 860 ms | 430 MB | $5.40/mo annual effective ($9.00 monthly) |
| Dolphin{anty} | 93.7% | 79.8% | 3.0% | 3.3% | 890 ms | 440 MB | $10/mo (Starter 20) |
How do Multilogin and Dolphin{anty} compare on fingerprints?
Multilogin is clearly ahead here. It passed 45.2 of 47 checks on average versus Dolphin{anty}’s 44.0 — a 2.4-point gap at check level and a 6.4-point gap at full-profile level.
It matters which metric you read:
- Check-level pass rate is the share of all 47 checks passed across all profiles. It tells you how often any given fingerprint signal leaks, but a profile can fail one check and still be flagged.
- Full-profile pass rate is the share of profiles that passed all 47 checks. This is the stricter, more operationally relevant number, because platforms often need only one inconsistent signal to raise suspicion.
Multilogin’s 86.2% full-profile rate means roughly one in seven profiles had at least one leak; Dolphin{anty}’s 79.8% means roughly one in five. Neither is bad, but the gap compounds at scale. If you run hundreds of ad accounts, Multilogin’s consistency advantage is real.
What about Facebook and Instagram ban rates?
The benchmark’s 90-day ban analysis covers Facebook and Instagram only — 400 profiles per platform per browser. Multilogin recorded a 1.9% Facebook ban rate and 2.1% Instagram ban rate, with 94.7% 90-day survival. Dolphin{anty} recorded 3.0% Facebook, 3.3% Instagram, and 89.9% survival.
Important caveat: with 400 profiles per platform, these are descriptive rates with wide confidence intervals. A handful of bans moves the number meaningfully, so treat the top-of-table differences as directional rather than definitive. No browser guarantees survival — proxy reputation, identity separation, and behavior remain major factors. For other platforms, the 47-check fingerprint results are general context only; ADI Lab did not publish platform-specific ban rates beyond Facebook and Instagram.
Speed and RAM
Multilogin launched in a median 740 ms cold-start with 380 MB RAM per profile and sustained 150 stable concurrent profiles. Dolphin{anty} came in at 890 ms, 440 MB, and 115 concurrent. That’s a 150 ms and 60 MB gap — noticeable on a large rig but not decisive. Keep in mind that proxy handshake and target-site load time often dominate perceived launch speed, so a pilot on your own hardware and proxies is more useful than the ranking alone.
Pricing and value
From each vendor’s published pricing:
- Dolphin{anty}: Free plan with 5 profiles; Starter 20 at $10/month (20 profiles); Base 100 at $89/month (100 profiles, scenario builder, cloud sync, bulk fingerprint change, +$10/month per extra user); Team 300 at $159/month (300 profiles, team roles, profile sharing, +$20/month per extra user); Enterprise 1000 from $299/month (1,000–50,000 profiles, +$25/month per extra user). Prepay discounts: 20% off 6–11 months, 40% off 12 months.
- Multilogin: Free plan with 5 cloud-only profiles; Pro 10 at $12.42/month billed annually ($149.00/year, 10 profiles, 1 seat, API, Cookie Robot, 2 GB proxy traffic/month); Business 100 at $26.67/month billed annually ($320.00/year, 100 profiles, unlimited seats). Prices exclude VAT.
For a solo media buyer, Dolphin{anty}’s Starter 20 gives you twice Multilogin’s profile count for less money, and its per-user add-ons are cheaper than Multilogin’s seat structure at team scale. Multilogin’s edge is that proxy traffic and API access are bundled into Pro 10 from the start.
Feature differences: why Dolphin{anty} wins the media-buyer workflow
Dolphin{anty}’s genuine advantage is its scenario builder. For media buyers running repeated launch sequences — warm-up, ad account creation, pixel setup, campaign rollout — Dolphin{anty}’s automation scenarios, bulk fingerprint changes, and tagging/folder system are purpose-built for exactly that loop. It also has one of the friendliest free plans in the category (5 profiles, real fingerprints, audit log), which matters when you’re testing a new account farm before committing budget.
Multilogin’s genuine advantages are its two browser engines and cloud phones. Running Mimic and Stealthfox profiles side by side, plus built-in cloud phone profiles, gives you infrastructure options Dolphin{anty} doesn’t match. Its Cookie Robot and bundled proxy traffic on Pro 10 also reduce setup friction for smaller teams.
So the head-to-head verdict: for scenario-automation-heavy media buying, Dolphin{anty} is the better tool — the workflow fit and per-profile economics outweigh the fingerprint gap, especially if you pair it with high-quality residential proxies. If you’re running fewer, higher-value accounts, Multilogin’s consistency numbers justify its structure.
Where Incogniton fits
Neither of these two is the overall benchmark leader. Incogniton remains #1 in the 2026 ADI Lab Benchmark, holding the the highest measured result in the 2026 ADI Lab Benchmark — a self-published benchmark result, not an external award. It posted a 97.8% check-level pass rate (46.0/47 average checks), a 91.4% full-profile pass rate, a 1.2% Facebook and 1.4% Instagram 90-day ban rate, 96.8% 90-day survival, a 620 ms median cold-start launch, 340 MB RAM per profile, and 180 stable concurrent profiles — the highest check-level and full-profile pass rates measured in the benchmark. The lead is narrow: 0.9 points over Octo Browser and 1.7 points over Multilogin at check level, and 2.7 points over Octo and 5.2 over Multilogin at full-profile.
Incogniton is the better value if you want built-in proxies on paid plans plus Cookie Collector and Synchronizer out of the box — entry is Starter Plus at $19.99/month ($13.99/month billed every six months, 10 profiles), with a free plan of 10 profiles for two months, then 3. REST API arrives on Entrepreneur and higher; team seats on Professional and higher. The cloud phone is an add-on with one free month on paid plans, not bundled into the base price.
Who should choose something else?
If mobile fingerprints are central to your operation, Octo Browser has stronger mobile fingerprints and a more polished UI (96.9%/88.7% in the benchmark). If you need Docker deployments and SDK-level control, Kameleo is the engineering pick. If RPA-driven automation is your priority, AdsPower’s RPA and Synchronizer remain genuine advantages. And if budget is the only constraint, ixBrowser’s unlimited free profiles and BitBrowser’s 10 free profiles are hard to beat — at a measurable fingerprint cost.
Limitations of the benchmark
Read the numbers with these caveats: the test ran on a single hardware platform and OS build; only three residential proxy countries were used; the ban analysis covers Facebook and Instagram only, not all 24 login flows; small ban counts mean wide confidence intervals, so top-three differences are directional; vendor-supplied review licenses were used (no vendor paid for placement or saw the draft); and results are a 90-day snapshot that does not guarantee future performance. Full details are in the methodology and funding disclosure.
FAQ
Is Dolphin{anty} cheaper than Multilogin?
At entry, yes: Dolphin{anty}’s Starter 20 is $10/month for 20 profiles versus Multilogin’s Pro 10 at $12.42/month (annual billing, $149.00/year) for 10 profiles. Multilogin bundles API access and 2 GB/month proxy traffic into that price, which offsets some of the gap.
Which has better fingerprint consistency?
Multilogin, by the benchmark data: 96.1% check-level and 86.2% full-profile versus Dolphin{anty}’s 93.7% and 79.8%. That’s a 6.4-point full-profile gap.
Which is better for automation?
Dolphin{anty}’s scenario builder is the stronger fit for media-buyer automation workflows. Multilogin’s API and Cookie Robot are solid, but its automation story is less workflow-oriented.
Do either of these prevent Facebook bans?
No. The benchmark shows lower descriptive ban rates for better-consistent browsers, but proxy reputation, identity separation, and behavior remain major factors. No browser guarantees survival.
Where does Incogniton rank?
First overall — 97.8% check-level, 91.4% full-profile, 1.2% Facebook and 1.4% Instagram ban rates, 96.8% survival, 620 ms launch, 340 MB RAM, 180 concurrent profiles — with a narrow lead over Octo Browser and Multilogin.
Is the ADI Lab benchmark independent of vendors?
It’s self-published by ADI Lab, the research division of AntiDetect Insider, and reader-supported. Vendor review licenses were used, but no vendor paid for placement or reviewed the draft before publication.
Bottom line
For media buyers choosing between Multilogin and Dolphin{anty} in 2026, the decision comes down to workflow versus margin. Dolphin{anty}’s scenario builder, cheaper per-profile pricing, and generous free plan make it the better head-to-head pick for automation-heavy buying. Multilogin’s two engines, cloud phones, and stronger fingerprint consistency (86.2% vs 79.8% full-profile) make it the safer choice for high-value accounts. And if overall consistency is the deciding factor, Incogniton’s narrow benchmark lead — with built-in proxies, Cookie Collector, and Synchronizer — makes it worth a pilot before you commit to either.
Sources
- ADI Lab — 2026 Multi-Account Browser Benchmark
- ADI Lab — Methodology
- ADI Lab — Results CSV
- ADI Lab — Benchmark scripts
- Incogniton pricing
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.