Flora Incognita vs Pl@ntNet

Side by side

From each app's US App Store listing, website, FAQ and docs, checked 2026-10-21. "Not documented" means the pages we read say nothing, not that the feature is missing.

Ratings are Apple's public counts on 2026-10-21 across the US, Italy, Germany, France, the UK, Canada, Austria and Switzerland. They measure popularity, not accuracy.

How we compared

We make Plant Identifier, so read this as a comparison by an interested party, even though our app is not one of the two. Everything about Flora Incognita comes from its US App Store listing, its FAQ and its app page on floraincognita.com; everything about Pl@ntNet from its US App Store listing and its documentation, all read on 2026-10-21. We did not use either app for this page. Both projects quote accuracy figures for themselves; we cite one published third-party test instead. Where a page says nothing, we write "not documented", which is not the same as "no".

Coverage: Central Europe first, or a flora per region

Flora Incognita's FAQ says it distinguishes "over 30,000 different vascular plants, including wild herbs, trees, grasses, cacti, palms, ferns, and some cultivated plants", and warns that "cultivated varieties and cultivars are rarely supported". It publishes no list of regions. Two signals point to Central Europe: in an April 2020 reply on its US listing, the team wrote that it had "the main focus in Mid-Europe" so far, and its rating base today is overwhelmingly German. Its fact sheets adapt to your location, and the app page says the team aims for "a global geographic range" but that "not all information is available yet".

Pl@ntNet takes the opposite route. Its listing says it recognises "about 20,000 species" and names wild plants as its purpose: cultivated plants in parks and gardens are possible "but this is not its primary purpose." Species are grouped into floras by region or theme; the app chooses yours from your location, and a multi-flora search looks across all of them when you are unsure. For a guide to naming wild flowers yourself, see how to identify wildflowers.

How each one asks for photos

This is the most practical difference in the field.

Flora Incognita leads. You start with the flower, then "if necessary the leaf" (FAQ); which images it asks for, and in what order, depends on the growth form, the season and the photos already taken (app page). In offline mode it asks for three pictures per plant, "usually flower, leaf and whole plant". Its listing adds that sharp, close photos of flower, leaf, bark or fruit matter most.

Pl@ntNet follows. You send one or more photos and say which organ each shows. Its listing advises photographing flowers, fruits and leaves first, then details like thorns, buds or stem hairs, and warns that a photo of the whole plant "is often not sufficient to allow a reliable identification." Both approaches reward the same habit: one sharp photo per organ, not one wide shot. Our guide on how to photograph a plant for identification covers it step by step.

Offline use, account and what happens to your data

Offline. When Flora Incognita loses its connection, it switches to "Offline Mode": you save three-photo observations and identify them from your list later. Its app page states that identification itself "requires an internet connection". Pl@ntNet's embedded mode is a compressed model on the phone, available only in the mobile app; you need an account to download it, and its docs suggest re-running offline identifications online, where the model is updated more often.

Account. Flora Incognita works without a profile, but observations in a guest profile are lost if you log out or uninstall. A profile keeps your list across devices. Pl@ntNet asks you to create an account "to contribute and access all features".

Research use. This is why both are free. Flora Incognita's listing says collected observations answer research questions on topics like "the spread of invasive species or the effects of climate change", and its FAQ asks for your location because monitoring plant biodiversity "is only possible if we have locations". You can tag finds for public citizen-science projects. Pl@ntNet's listing says the plants you photograph "are collected and analysed by scientists around the world", and shared observations are reviewed by the community.

Your location and photos. Flora Incognita's FAQ says that for a photo loaded from your library, "the location and time of the shot are read from the photo and saved in the observation." Pl@ntNet's data page says it "does not share its users' personal data with third parties"; what is public is "images, identifications, and plant locations if they have been made public", and for rare or endangered species you can keep the location confidential (both read 2026-10-21).

What an independent test found

In a 2020 study in AoB PLANTS, Hamlyn Jones ran 38 images of 24 wild species from the British and Irish flora through nine free apps, five times each. Flora Incognita named the species correctly in 46% of runs and Pl@ntNet in 39%, a difference the paper's statistics did not separate. The clearer gap was in wrong answers: Flora Incognita gave the wrong family or worse in 14% of runs, Pl@ntNet in 43%, and the author singled out Flora Incognita and Seek as "the most conservative apps", tending "not to give an answer where there is uncertainty". The paper also noted that both apps return explicit confidence levels. These are 2020 versions; both apps have since changed their models.

A third option for houseplants and gardens: Plant Identifier (ours)

This section is about our own app, so weigh it accordingly. Neither research app is built for the plants on your windowsill: Flora Incognita rarely supports cultivars, and Pl@ntNet says cultivated plants are not its primary purpose. Plant Identifier, listed on the US App Store as AI Plant Identifier Flower App, is an iPhone app aimed at houseplants, garden plants and flowers. One photo gives the common and scientific names, origin and growing conditions; the Diagnose tool gives a likely cause for spotted or yellowing leaves with a severity badge the AI writes, treatment steps and prevention; Care Guide, Light, Water Calculator and Toxicology are separate tools on the home screen, and you can ask follow-up questions under any result. It needs no account and is free to download; the current version shows no paywall.

What leaves your phone, per our privacy policy: the photo, your approximate location (only if you allow it, or if the library photo you choose carries one), the text of your chat messages and a random install and device identifier go to our server, which passes requests to Google (Gemini) and, when Google's service fails, to OpenAI. Our server does not store your photos or messages, and the app feeds no research project.

Where Plant Identifier is not the pick

• Wild plants on a walk: both research apps are built for them and show ranked candidates. Plant Identifier shows one name and no alternatives.
• No signal: both apps keep working in some form offline; Plant Identifier needs an internet connection for every identification.
• Android, Mac or the web: Plant Identifier is iPhone-only and runs on iPad in iPhone layout.
• Several photos of one plant: both apps combine photos of different organs; Plant Identifier takes one photo per identification.
• Science and evidence: your observations in either app can feed biodiversity research, and both appear in published tests. Plant Identifier does neither.

If you are weighing a paid care app instead, see PictureThis vs Pl@ntNet.