Pl@ntNet alternatives, matched to why you're looking

Try this before you switch

Pl@ntNet's listing gives its own advice, and it explains most bad results: flowers, fruits and leaves are "the most characteristic organs" and should be photographed first, and a photo of the whole plant "is often not sufficient to allow a reliable identification". For a tree, that means:

1. Photograph a single leaf up close, flat, in even light, and tag it as a leaf.
2. Add a second photo of the flower, fruit or seed if there is one, tagged as such.
3. Add the bark as a third photo, but don't rely on it: in the Rutgers tree test, bark photos were named to the right genus far less often than leaf photos by every app.
4. If you're unsure which regional flora to search, use the multi-flora search the listing describes, which looks across all floras.

If Pl@ntNet still misses on trees you know, compare it against an alternative with the 15-minute test at the end of this page.

How we compared

We make Tree Identifier. We compared the alternatives on what each app documents about itself: its US App Store listing (price, in-app purchases, privacy label, description), its website and help pages, all read on 2026-10-21. We did not use the other apps or run lab tests. For accuracy we cite published third-party tests only, never an app's claim about itself. Where a page says nothing, we write "not documented", never "no". We publish no accuracy figure for Tree Identifier, because none has been measured independently.

Free alternatives

• iNaturalist (706 ratings, average 4.08, US App Store, checked 2026-10-21, for the redesigned app). Free and nonprofit. The AI suggests a name and other people can confirm or correct it, and your observation becomes public biodiversity data. On trees it scored higher than Pl@ntNet in the 2020 Rutgers test (92.27% against 85.45% of leaf photos named to the right genus, from the team's Rutgers poster), and on pasture plants in the 2025 University of Maryland Extension test (79% against 66% right on the first suggestion). It also has a website and an Android app.
• Seek by iNaturalist (30,912 ratings, average 4.75, US App Store, checked 2026-10-21). Free, no account, "designed to be safe for children", identifies on the device without a connection, and keeps your records on your phone. iNaturalist says its model is generally older than the online one. On iPhone, iPad and Android. The full comparison is on Seek vs iNaturalist.
• Flora Incognita (595 ratings, average 4.8, US App Store, checked 2026-10-21). Free and without advertising, its US listing says, because it is part of a research project by scientists at the Technical University of Ilmenau and the Max Planck Institute for Biogeochemistry in Jena. It is aimed at wild plants and keeps your finds in an observation list with maps. In Hamlyn Jones's 2020 test of British plants, its first suggestion was right to species 46% of the time, against 39% for Pl@ntNet.

Paid alternative: PictureThis

PictureThis, listed as PictureThis - Plant Identifier (1,120,486 ratings, average 4.8, US App Store, checked 2026-10-21), is the app to pick if you want care tools: disease diagnosis with treatment plans, watering reminders, a light meter, weed and toxic-plant identification, and 24/7 chat with plant experts. It came first in both the Rutgers tree test and the Maryland pasture-plant test. It is free to download, but on 2026-10-21 its US listing showed PictureThis Pro purchases from $3.99 to $39.99 and a Family Plan at $49.99, and its privacy label lists purchases, identifiers and usage data as used to track you; Pl@ntNet's label lists no tracking. The side-by-side is on Pl@ntNet vs PictureThis.

Built in: Visual Look Up and Google Lens

On an iPhone with iOS 15 or later, open a photo in Photos, tap the Info button, then the leaf icon; Apple says results come "from Siri Knowledge and the web". Google Lens does the same inside the free Google app, on Android and in Chrome on a computer. Both are generalists, fine for a quick name. In the Maryland test's bar chart of average scores, Visual Look Up sat a little below Pl@ntNet and Google Lens well below it.

Trees first: Tree Identifier (ours)

Tree Identifier, listed as Tree Identifier AI: ID Trees, is our iPhone app built around trees. One photo of a leaf, the bark, a flower, fruit or the whole tree returns the common and scientific names, origin, growing conditions and key traits, with a follow-up chat under each result and an AI Tree Expert tab. Finds fill a 138-species tree Collection and, with location allowed, a Tree Map. It needs no account and is free to download with optional in-app purchases (Tree Identifier Pro, $2.99 to $19.99 on its US listing, 2026-10-21).

Against Pl@ntNet it gives up a lot: it is iPhone only (it runs on iPad in iPhone layout), needs a connection for every identification, takes one photo at a time with no organ tags, shows no confidence score or list of other candidates, has no community review, and has no published test. Pick it only if a tree-focused log and follow-up questions matter more to you than those.

A 15-minute test before you switch

Pick a tree whose name you know for certain, such as a labelled park tree. Take five photos: a single leaf, the bark at chest height, a twig with buds, a fruit or cone, and the whole tree. Run them through Pl@ntNet and through the alternative you're considering. Score each answer for the right genus and the right species. If the alternative does no better on your trees, Pl@ntNet, free and open, is hard to beat. The best tree identification apps page explains the test in more detail.