Browser fingerprint tests, explained
What the popular fingerprint test sites actually check, how to read their verdicts, and which "bad" results show up on a perfectly normal browser. Every guide includes results we measured ourselves.
| Test site | How it reports | What it looks at | A person's everyday Chrome got | Guide |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Iphey | One-word trust verdict plus an "MX score" | Browser · Location and IP · Hardware · Software | "Unreliable" · MX 80 · Hardware and Software: everything is fine | Guide |
| Pixelscan | Consistent or inconsistent, plus four status cards | Location · Proxy · Fingerprint (masking) · Bot check · Browser compatibility | Inconsistent · No proxy · Masking detected · No automated behavior | Guide |
| BrowserScan | Authenticity percentage with itemised deductions | Bot control · IP and WebRTC · Time zone · Hardware hashes · Software | 100% | Guide |
| CreepJS | Per-section hashes plus headless and stealth percentages | Headless · Lies · Workers · Rendering · WebRTC, time zone and more | 19% like headless · 0% headless · 0% stealth | Guide |
| BrowserLeaks | No overall score; raw values per test page | IP Address · JavaScript · WebRTC Leak Test · Canvas and WebGL · Fonts · TLS Client Test | Not measured by hand | Guide |
| AmIUnique | Unique or not, with per-attribute similarity ratios | HTTP headers · JavaScript attributes · Rendering | Unique among 5,531,402 · user agent 0.06% · canvas 0.04% | Guide |
| Cover Your Tracks | Tracker-blocking checks plus bits of identifying information | Tracker blocking · Fingerprint protection · Fingerprint attributes | Strong protection against web tracking · unique among 315,293 browsers tested in 45 days · at least 18.27 bits | Guide |
Measured on 20 and 21 September 2026 on one Windows 11 PC (NVIDIA RTX 3070) on a home fibre connection in the Netherlands, with no proxy or VPN. Three browsers: a person's everyday Chrome 153 with an ad blocker, used by hand; the same genuine Chrome 153 driven by Playwright; and Clearcote 153 driven by Playwright with a fingerprint seed.
Results that show up on normal browsers
- Iphey
An "Unreliable" headline on an ordinary home connection. In our test it fired on every browser, including one used by hand.
Iphey, explained - Pixelscan
"Inconsistent" on an ordinary browser. Neither browser in our test, including the one used by a person, got "consistent".
Pixelscan, explained - BrowserScan
"IP addresses are different" on a normal dual-stack connection, where the page loads over IPv6 and WebRTC reports IPv4. In the same run BrowserScan also showed "Proxy: Yes" for a home line with no proxy.
BrowserScan, explained - CreepJS
A non-zero "like headless" percentage. Even the person's own Chrome showed 19%.
CreepJS, explained - BrowserLeaks
A WebRTC host address ending in
BrowserLeaks, explained.local. That is mDNS protection hiding your LAN address. - AmIUnique
"You are unique" on a completely ordinary browser. It is the normal result.
AmIUnique, explained - Cover Your Tracks
"Unique fingerprint" on a browser that otherwise blocks trackers well. Blocking trackers and resisting fingerprinting are separate things.
Cover Your Tracks, explained
Three things to know before you trust a verdict
Normal browsers fail too
A person's own Chrome was called "Unreliable" by Iphey and "inconsistent" by Pixelscan. Read the individual checks, not just the headline.
Your connection counts
Time zone versus IP, IPv6 versus IPv4 and proxy detection drive many verdicts. Those are about the network, not the browser.
Unique is normal
AmIUnique and Cover Your Tracks call almost every browser unique. That is about tracking, not about looking like a bot.
Want each check explained instead of a single verdict? Run the Clearcote audit: 365 checks, each with a plain-English explanation.