Multi-factor authentication · November 2026 Edition
Cisco Duo vs Authy
Eleven of fourteen models named Cisco Duo first on the direct prompt; zero named Authy. Cisco Duo was named by fourteen of the fourteen models and Authy by eight and Cisco Duo carries 66 labels and Authy 13, so the shares are not directly comparable.
Named in six categories this edition.
Named in one category this edition.
First-choice share43%2%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate2%31%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#1#6A position in a field of 11; printed, not drawn.
Labels6613A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, Cisco Duo reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.Microsoft Entra ID was named alongside these two in fourteen of the fourteen direct answers. Cisco Duo vs Microsoft Entra ID · Cisco Duo vs Okta Verify · Cisco Duo vs Google Authenticator
Share is the count of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts over all fourteen models, for a mid-market B2B company; rank is within the category; every quote names the model and the prompt it came from. Both figures come from the multi-factor authentication page.
By framing
How many of the fourteen models made each the first choice, per way of asking, and how many argued against it.
Cisco DuoFirst choices, of fourteen modelsAuthy
Direct110
Paraphrase100
Comparative20
Budget-constrained511 against Authy
Scale-constrained20
Negative001 against Cisco Duo · 3 against Authy
Bars are first choices, 0 to 14 each sideModels that argued againstA model can name both, so the two sides of a row do not sum to fourteen.
Every model, every framing
The eighty-four answers behind the chart above, one cell each: where Cisco Duo and Authy stood in it.
| Model | Direct | Paraphrase | Comparative | Budget-constrained | Scale-constrained | Negative |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | | | | | ||
| GPT-5.4 mini | | | | |||
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | | | | | | |
| Perplexity Sonar | | | | | ||
| Grok 4.20 | | | | | | |
| Mistral Small | | | | |||
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | | | | | | |
| Llama 4 Maverick | | | | |||
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | | | | | | |
| Kimi K2 | | | | | | |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | | | | | | |
| MiniMax M2.5 | | | | | ||
| GPT-6 Luna | | | | | ||
| Muse Glimmer 30B | | | | |
Cisco Duo Authy first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Cisco Duo on the left and Authy on the right.The direct prompt
The plain question, one answer per model, grouped by where Cisco Duo and Authy stood in it.
Cisco Duo first, Authy not the choice
11 of 14 modelsAuthy was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.Claude Haiku 4.5Cisco Duo alternatives: JumpCloud Protect, Microsoft Entra ID, Okta Verify
Gemini 3.5 FlashCisco Duo alternatives: Auth0, JumpCloud Protect, Microsoft Entra ID, Okta Verify, WorkOS
Perplexity SonarCisco Duo alternatives: JumpCloud Protect, Microsoft Entra ID, Okta Verify
Grok 4.20Cisco Duo, Microsoft Entra ID
Mistral SmallCisco Duo, Microsoft Entra ID alternatives: Okta Verify, OneLogin MFA
DeepSeek V4 FlashCisco Duo alternatives: Auth0, Microsoft Entra ID
Llama 4 MaverickCisco Duo alternatives: Microsoft Entra ID, Okta Verify
Kimi K2Cisco Duo alternatives: Microsoft Entra ID, Okta Verify
GLM 4.7 FlashXCisco Duo alternatives: Microsoft Entra ID
MiniMax M2.5Cisco Duo alternatives: Microsoft Entra ID
Muse Glimmer 30BCisco Duo alternatives: Microsoft Entra ID, Okta Verify
Neither was the first choice, one was named
2 of 14 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.Qwen 3.7 FlashMicrosoft Entra ID, Okta Verify alternatives: Cisco Duo, JumpCloud Protect
GPT-6 LunaMicrosoft Entra ID alternatives: Cisco Duo, Okta Verify
Neither was named
1 of 14 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.GPT-5.4 miniMicrosoft Entra ID, Okta Verify
Bold names in an answer are the products the judge labeled a first choice; a model naming several gives each of them that label. The full answer text for every row is in the record.
By buyer segment
The same question asked on behalf of a different buyer. Each standing is computed within its segment and they are never added together. The figures above are the mid-market standing, which is the one the category orders by.
Small business
Cisco Duo leads by thirty-seven points.
Cisco Duo37%#1 of 10Authy0%#10 of 10Mid-marketThe figures above
Cisco Duo leads by forty-two points.
Cisco Duo43%#1 of 11Authy2%#6 of 11Enterprise
Cisco Duo leads by twenty-one points.
Cisco Duo21%#2 of 8Authy0%#– of 8What the models said about Cisco Duo
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Four of five in this category shown.
“Legacy or basic versions of popular solutions (e.g., older Duo...): These can still fall to AiTM phishing, session token theft, or prompt bombing.” Grok 4.20 · negative prompt · soft negative
“Need fast rollout, minimal training, hybrid on-prem/cloud | Cisco Duo (broad protocol support, device trust, low admin overhead)” Qwen 3.7 Flash · comparative prompt · first choice
“Cisco Duo and Microsoft Entra ID (formerly Azure AD) are both highly recommended multi-factor authentication (MFA) tools” Mistral Small · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“The best MFA solution for a company with a limited budget is Duo Free or Google Authenticator for under 10 users.” Llama 4 Maverick · budget prompt · first choice
What the models said about Authy
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Six of eight in this category shown.
“TOTP authenticator apps – e.g., Google Authenticator, Authy. They are stronger than SMS/email, but the 6-digit codes can be phished in real time” Muse Glimmer 30B · negative prompt · soft negative
“Examples: Google Authenticator, Authy, 1Password, Microsoft Authenticator ... Key Risk: Phishing via Adversary-in-the-Middle (AitM)” Gemini 3.5 Flash · negative prompt · soft negative
“Apps like Google Authenticator, Microsoft Authenticator (in TOTP mode), or Authy generate 6-digit codes ... not phishing-resistant” DeepSeek V4 Flash · negative prompt · soft negative
“The most cost-effective option is authenticator apps like: Google Authenticator, Microsoft Authenticator, Authy” Claude Haiku 4.5 · budget prompt · first choice
“TOTP Apps: Authy, Google Authenticator, Microsoft Authenticator. Better than SMS, but lacks the phishing resistance of hardware keys.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · negative prompt · alternative
“Very good: Authenticator apps (e.g., Microsoft Authenticator, Authy, or Google Authenticator) with number matching” Grok 4.20 · negative prompt · alternative
Also compared
Comparisons are drawn for the top eight products in each category, each against each. The output is the models' output; nothing here is a recommendation by the index.