Gane Index
All indexesEvery index and its categoriesGTMMarketing, sales, customer and revenue operations softwareITSecurity, IT operations, cloud, developer and data softwareHRHR, payroll, recruiting, performance and learning softwareFinanceAccounting, planning, spend, billing and treasury software
Claim your listing
Index › IT › Identity and access › MFA › Google Authenticator vs Authy
Multi-factor authentication · November 2026 Edition

Google Authenticator vs Authy

Zero of fourteen models named Google Authenticator first on the direct prompt; zero named Authy. Google Authenticator was named by thirteen of the fourteen models and Authy by eight and Google Authenticator carries 32 labels and Authy 13, so the shares are not directly comparable.

Google Authenticator

criticized challenger

Named in one category this edition.

Authy

criticized challenger

Named in one category this edition.

First-choice share6%2%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate44%31%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#4#6A position in a field of 11; printed, not drawn.
Labels3213A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, Google Authenticator 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 Google Authenticator · Cisco Duo vs Authy · Microsoft Entra ID 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.
Google AuthenticatorFirst choices, of fourteen modelsAuthy
Direct001 against Google Authenticator
Paraphrase001 against Google Authenticator
Comparative004 against Google Authenticator
Budget-constrained412 against Google Authenticator · 1 against Authy
Scale-constrained00
Negative006 against Google Authenticator · 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.

Across every category in the November 2026 Edition, Google Authenticator and Authy were named in the same answer twenty-six times, of the 76 answers naming Google Authenticator and the 28 naming Authy. In those answers Authy took the first choice zero times and Google Authenticator three.

Every model, every framing

The eighty-four answers behind the chart above, one cell each: where Google Authenticator and Authy stood in it.
ModelDirectParaphraseComparativeBudget-constrainedScale-constrainedNegative
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
Google Authenticator Authy first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Google Authenticator on the left and Authy on the right.

The direct prompt

The plain question, one answer per model, grouped by where Google Authenticator and Authy stood in it.

Neither was named

14 of 14 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.
Claude Haiku 4.5Cisco Duo alternatives: JumpCloud Protect, Microsoft Entra ID, Okta Verify
GPT-5.4 miniMicrosoft 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
Qwen 3.7 FlashMicrosoft Entra ID, Okta Verify alternatives: Cisco Duo, JumpCloud Protect
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
GPT-6 LunaMicrosoft Entra ID alternatives: Cisco Duo, Okta Verify
Muse Glimmer 30BCisco Duo alternatives: Microsoft 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
Google Authenticator leads by seven points.
Google Authenticator7%#4 of 10
Authy0%#10 of 10
The full small business standing →
Mid-marketThe figures above
Google Authenticator leads by five points.
Google Authenticator6%#4 of 11
Authy2%#6 of 11
The full mid-market standing →
Enterprise
Level: the same share of first choices.
Google Authenticator0%#8 of 8
Authy0%#– of 8
The full enterprise standing →

What the models said about Google Authenticator

Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Six of eight in this category shown.

“Avoid for mid-size: Pure consumer tools like Google Authenticator (too basic, no central management)” Grok 4.20 · paraphrase prompt · hard negative
“Google Authenticator is too basic” Grok 4.20 · direct prompt · hard negative
“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
“For the absolute tightest budget, Google Authenticator (free) combined with strong password policies is the best starting point” MiniMax M2.5 · budget prompt · first choice
“If you are on a budget the free ones are Microsoft Authenticator and Google's Authenticator.” Muse Glimmer 30B · budget prompt · first choice
“Start with authenticator apps combined with your platform's built-in MFA features” Claude Haiku 4.5 · 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
Cisco Duo vs Google AuthenticatorCisco Duo vs AuthyMicrosoft Entra ID vs Google AuthenticatorMicrosoft Entra ID vs AuthyOkta Verify vs Google AuthenticatorOkta Verify vs AuthyGoogle Authenticator vs Microsoft AuthenticatorMicrosoft Authenticator vs AuthyAll fifteen head-to-head pages and the full MFA standing

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.