Fingerprint test sites show what your browser reveals to websites, but each one checks a different set of signals and reaches its verdict in its own way. Pixelscan looks for consistency and signs of masking, BrowserLeaks lists raw values test by test, CreepJS hunts for tampering, AmIUnique compares you with a research database, and Iphey gives a trust score. None of them is the website you actually care about.
This guide explains what each site checks, whether it gives one verdict, what it says about storing your data, and which commercial ties it discloses. All facts below were checked on 24 October 2026 on each site's own pages. Where we couldn't confirm something, we say so.
Which fingerprint test sites are there, and how do they differ?
The best-known testers fall into three groups: verdict tools that give a single result (Pixelscan, Iphey), raw-data tools that list values without judging them (BrowserLeaks), and research tools that measure tampering or uniqueness (CreepJS, AmIUnique). The table sums up what we could verify.
| Site | Main focus | Single verdict or score | Compares you with a visitor database | Stores data | Commercial ties seen |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pixelscan | Consistency, masking and automation | Yes: consistent, unsure or inconsistent | Not documented | Yes, fingerprints and IP addresses | Partner offers, calls Multilogin "our partner" |
| BrowserLeaks | Raw values for each signal | No | Not documented | Says it doesn't store fingerprints | None seen |
| CreepJS | Tampering and "lies" in browser values | No single score; shows percentages per section | Not verified | Not verified | None seen (open source) |
| AmIUnique | Uniqueness among observed browsers | Uniqueness statistics | Yes | Yes, after you choose to see your fingerprint | None seen (research project) |
| Iphey | Trust of your identity | Yes: "MX Score" | Says its settings come from real-people fingerprint databases | Not verified | Proxy and antidetect partner offers |
| Whoer | IP and anonymity checks | Not verified | Not verified | Not verified | VPN purchase and trial pages |
What does Pixelscan check?
Pixelscan describes itself as "a public browser test that identifies automated or masked browsers" (Pixelscan Manifest). It checks whether your browser's details agree with each other, and whether it sees signs of fingerprint masking or automation.
Its FAQ lists canvas rendering, WebGL, audio context, fonts and screen properties, plus "User-Agent integrity", operating system consistency and "Timezone and language alignment". The site map also lists separate tools for IP, bot check, DNS, WebRTC, VPN detection, proxy checking, IP blacklists and location.
Verdict. The site's code defines a consistency result of "Inconsistent", "Unsure" or "Consistent". Its changelog repeatedly mentions detecting "traces of browser fingerprint masking" and "Automation framework detection". The same changelog lists many fixes for false positive masking detection on iOS, Android, Linux and macOS Safari, a useful reminder that its verdict can be wrong.
Data. Pixelscan's privacy policy (last updated 5 February 2026) says it stores browser fingerprint information and visitors' IP addresses. It shares anonymized data, without IP addresses, with partners, and says: "Our partners are web bot and anti-detect browser developers." Its Manifest adds: "Pixelscan will never sell your data to anti-fraud systems."
Commercial ties. The Pixelscan blog calls Multilogin, an antidetect browser, "our partner" and gives promo codes (example post, partner page). A Partners page lists proxy and antidetect deals. We found no statement about who owns or runs the site; it only says "Small team. High expertise". Whether the checker is free isn't stated, though we saw no price for it.
What does BrowserLeaks check?
BrowserLeaks is a set of separate tests that each show raw values, with no overall score. It calls itself "a suite of tools … to evaluate the security and privacy of your web browser" (browserleaks.com).
The home page lists tests for the IP address (with whois and a TCP/IP OS fingerprint), JavaScript, WebRTC leaks, canvas, WebGL, fonts, geolocation, feature detection, TLS (JA3 and JA4) and content filters. More tools cover QUIC, HTTP/2, Chrome extensions, WebGPU, Client Hints, DNS leaks, CSS media queries, ClientRects and Do Not Track / Global Privacy Control.
The IP page shows country, city, ISP, ASN, a "Usage Type", time zone, IPv6, WebRTC and DNS leak checks, TCP/IP and TLS fingerprints, and your headers. It names its location source as DB-IP. The proxy page checks proxy headers, Tor and letterboxing, canvas protection and content filters.
Data. The home page says BrowserLeaks "does not collect personal data, store user fingerprints, or set non-essential cookies". We didn't see anything for sale. The operator isn't named on the pages we read.
What does CreepJS check?
CreepJS is an open-source research page that looks for weaknesses and tampering in anti-fingerprinting tools. Its author, GitHub user abrahamjuliot, says the aim is to "shed light on weaknesses and privacy leaks" in anti-fingerprinting extensions and browsers, and "not to create a fingerprinting library" (README). It is MIT-licensed.
Its tests include CSS styles, HTML elements, JavaScript math, console errors, emoji and DOMRect sizes, SVG, audio, canvas, TextMetrics, WebGL and GPU parameters, fonts, speech voices, screen and time zone. One goal in the README is to "Detect and ignore JavaScript tampering (prototype lies)". The live page shows an "FP ID", a "Fuzzy" value, a "Headless" section with "like headless", "headless" and "stealth" percentages, and a "Resistance" section.
The README says the only official deployment is on GitHub Pages and calls copies on other domains unauthorized mirrors. Whether CreepJS stores visitor data on a server isn't something we could verify.
What does AmIUnique check?
AmIUnique is a research project that tells you how rare your fingerprint is among the browsers it has seen. It is maintained by a team of researchers, hosted at Inria, with a contact address at the University of Lille (about).
It collects HTTP headers, plugins, platform, cookie and Do Not Track preferences, time zone, screen, storage support, canvas and WebGL images, audio and video formats, ad blocker presence and fonts (FAQ). The result is "statistics about the degree of unicity" of your device in its sample. Clicking "See My Fingerprint" collects your fingerprint and sets a cookie for four months (amiunique.org). It also offers an Android app and a Chrome extension for contributing data.
What does Iphey check?
Iphey gives one trust score, called the "MX Score", and its page states that the fingerprint technology is "powered by MixVisit" (iphey.com). It presents the score as "How trustworthy is your identity", and its FAQ also calls it a "Trust Score".
Its tools cover a fingerprint check, an IP check, VPN and proxy detection, a bot check, a DNS leak test and an IP blacklist check. The FAQ mentions the user agent, canvas, WebRTC, AudioContext, fonts and plugins, and a check for a time zone that doesn't match the IP. It says its settings come "from our databases of browser fingerprints, collected from real people".
Commercial ties. The page shows a residential proxy banner and partner offers for Floppydata (proxies), Gologin and 1browser (antidetect browsers). Its own FAQ is frank about limits: "It is almost impossible to completely hide a fingerprint."
What does Whoer check?
We couldn't read Whoer's pages: every request on 24 October 2026 met a bot challenge. So we can't describe its checks or its score here, and we'd rather say less than guess.
What we could verify: Whoer's robots.txt lists /vpn/buy, /vpn/trial and /vpn/payment/ paths, so the site has VPN purchase and trial pages. A browser add-on listing, "Whoer VPN by foxwhoer", names whoer.net/vpn as its service site (Opera add-ons). Keep in mind that a site selling a VPN has a reason to present results in a way that favors one.
Why do fingerprint test sites disagree?
Testers disagree because they check different signals, use different reference data and draw the line between "fine" and "suspicious" in different places. A browser can pass one and fail another on the same day without anything being wrong.
- Different signals. BrowserLeaks reads TLS and TCP/IP fingerprints; CreepJS looks for JavaScript "lies"; AmIUnique cares about rarity. Each sees a different slice.
- Different IP data. Location, ISP and "usage type" come from IP databases. BrowserLeaks names DB-IP; other sites use other sources, and databases disagree about the same address.
- Different reference sets. A score based on a visitor database depends on who visited. AmIUnique's sample and Iphey's fingerprint database aren't the same population.
- Changing rules. Pixelscan's changelog shows its masking detection being tuned and corrected over time. A result from last month may not match today's.
- Different interests. Some sites earn money from partners who sell proxies, VPNs or antidetect browsers. That doesn't make their tests wrong, but it is worth knowing when a result comes with an offer next to it.
How should you read the results?
Read results for consistency first and uniqueness second. A browser whose time zone, languages, IP location, user agent and WebRTC address agree with each other is in good shape, even if a tester calls it rare.
Uniqueness on its own isn't a warning sign. Ordinary browsers differ in fonts, graphics and settings, which is exactly what AmIUnique studies. What makes a browser stand out is a contradiction: a Windows user agent with macOS client hints, a Berlin time zone behind a US IP, a canvas hash that changes on every read, or a WebRTC address that differs from the IP the site sees. Our guide to browser fingerprinting explains each of these signals.
A few habits help:
- Look for the reason, not the color. A red mark means something only when you know which value caused it.
- Repeat the test. Run it twice. Stable values that stay stable are good; values that change on every load are a problem.
- Compare two or three testers. If they all point to the same mismatch, fix it. If only one complains, check what that one measures before you change anything.
- Don't chase a perfect score. A test page is not the site you plan to use, and no tester can tell you how another website will treat you.
How do you test a browser profile?
Open each test inside the profile you want to check, with its proxy on, and work from the network outward. Start with the IP, then WebRTC, then the fingerprint details.
- Proxy and IP. Our proxy checker shows the IP, country, city, time zone, ASN and ISP that websites see. Confirm it is the proxy you expect.
- WebRTC. The WebRTC leak test compares the public IP that WebRTC reveals with the IP the site sees, and lists local addresses.
- Overall consistency. The browser fingerprint test compares your time zone, languages, WebRTC IP, user agent and automation flag with your IP. It runs in your browser and stores nothing.
- Canvas. The canvas fingerprint test checks whether the canvas hash is stable, whether noise was added and whether text measuring still works.
- WebGL. The WebGL fingerprint test shows your graphics renderer and a hash of a 3D image, and whether they fit the system the browser claims.
- Audio. The audio fingerprint test shows the AudioContext value and whether it stays the same between runs.
Then, if you like, compare with one or two of the third-party sites above. In our own test on 22 October 2026, on macOS with Multime's Chrome 152 engine, Pixelscan reported a Multime profile as consistent, with "No masking detected" and "No automated behavior detected". That is one tool on one date, not a guarantee, and Multime doesn't mask everything: screen size is always the real screen, and media devices, speech voices and custom font lists aren't masked.