Authenticator Mobile－2FA, MFA vs Google
Revenue, downloads, ratings and category context for two iOS apps. Figures are estimates and should be read as ranges, not exact totals.
Authenticator Mobile－2FA, MFAFLOOMIX LTD - Utilities
GoogleGoogle - Utilities| Metric | Authenticator Mobile－2FA, MFA | Readout | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Estimated revenue / mo | $*** - opens with trial | $*** - opens with trial | Tie |
| Revenue band | $*** - opens with trial | $*** - opens with trial | Use range + confidence |
| Estimated downloads / mo | $*** - opens with trial | $*** - opens with trial | |
| Download band | $*** - opens with trial | $*** - opens with trial | Use range + confidence |
| Rating | - | 4.65 | |
| Rating count | - | 4.9M | |
| Tracked keywords | — | 2 | |
| Category | Utilities | Utilities | Same market |
Which app is bigger?
Authenticator Mobile－2FA, MFA and Google are compared inside Utilities with monthly revenue, downloads, rating, review volume, keyword footprint, category placement and range context. Google leads on monthly downloads in the current readout, and Tie wins the revenue readout (the exact figures open with the paid plan), Google wins demand, Google has deeper review volume, and Google has the larger tracked keyword footprint. The better app depends on the job: choose the revenue leader when you need monetization proof, choose the download leader when reach matters, and choose the higher-rated or deeper-reviewed app when market trust is the constraint. Read both ranges rather than only the midpoint, then open the category hub and related collections to see whether this pair is an outlier or a normal category pattern.