Pixelscan focuses on canvas/WebGL rendering and automation-flag detection; Iphey runs a broader consistency check with different internal weighting. Neither replaces the other — disagreement between the two is more informative than either score alone.
Pixelscan and Iphey are the two most commonly screenshotted fingerprint checkers in antidetect browser marketing, and they're often treated as interchangeable. They're not — they weight different signals, and a profile can score well on one while raising flags on the other.
Pixelscan is built around canvas and WebGL rendering consistency, plus detection of automation flags like an exposed navigator.webdriver property. It's the closest free approximation of what a mid-tier ad-platform anti-fraud check looks like, which is why vendors lean on it for marketing screenshots.
Iphey runs a wider consistency check — similar in spirit to CreepJS — but weights signals differently internally. It's most useful as a second opinion when you need to confirm a Pixelscan result wasn't a fluke, or when the two disagree.
A profile that passes Pixelscan but flags on Iphey usually means the canvas/WebGL layer is clean but something else — timezone/IP mismatch, hardware concurrency inconsistency — is contradicting the claimed device profile. That's a more useful signal than either tool passing alone.
Nativ Browser's profile generation is built to keep dependent signals internally coherent rather than randomizing each parameter independently — which is exactly the failure mode that trips up one checker but not the other. As with any antidetect tool, run both checkers rather than trusting a single screenshot.
For the network-layer checks neither of these tools cover, see our BrowserLeaks guide, or the full testing methodology.