The arguments against Brave that crystallized in the privacy-tools community around 2022 are worth revisiting in 2026. Some of the concerns turned out to be more prescient than others. Some were overstated at the time and feel quaint now. Some have aged into more substantial issues. The product Brave is in 2026 is meaningfully different from the product it was three years ago, and the case for and against has shifted.
This piece is the retrospective look at the Brave question, written by someone who recommended Brave in 2020, stopped recommending it in 2023, and has been watching the product evolve since.
The original concerns, briefly
The 2022 wave of criticism focused on a few specific items:
The Basic Attention Token (BAT) cryptocurrency built into the browser, which positioned Brave as a vehicle for crypto-adjacent advertising rather than a pure privacy tool.
The brief 2020 controversy where Brave’s address bar autocompleted certain URLs (binance.com being the example that got noticed) by appending an affiliate code without user consent. The behavior was acknowledged and reverted, but signaled that the product team was thinking about Brave as an affiliate-revenue vehicle.
The continuous addition of features that were not about reading the web (cryptocurrency wallet, then cryptocurrency exchange integration, then NFT support, then Web3 integrations), each adding surface area and complexity to what had been pitched as a privacy browser.
The shift in marketing emphasis from “privacy” toward “rewards,” which was reasonable as a business model evolution but which complicated the privacy-first positioning.
What has happened since
The cryptocurrency emphasis has moderated. Brave has not abandoned BAT or the crypto wallet, but the in-browser prompts pushing users toward earning rewards have been less aggressive in recent versions. The wallet remains but is more clearly opt-in than push-marketed.
The product line has expanded substantially. Brave Search launched and has become a credible privacy-respecting search alternative. Brave Talk (their video conferencing) launched and was discontinued (a healthy sign that the company can sunset features that did not find traction). Brave Leo (their AI assistant integration) launched and is functional.
The browser engine itself has continued to be solid. Tracker blocking remains best-in-class among Chromium-based browsers. Performance is competitive. Updates are timely.
The Mullvad Browser launched in 2023, providing a hardened-Firefox alternative for users specifically seeking the most-privacy-focused option. This shifted some of the most-privacy-conscious users away from Brave toward Mullvad Browser, which had implications for Brave’s positioning in the privacy-tools community.
The Manifest V3 transition in Chromium-based browsers (which restricts the capabilities of ad blocker extensions) became a real concern for Chrome users in 2024-2025. Brave’s response, leveraging their built-in shields system, was more user-friendly than Chrome’s transition. This made Brave a more reasonable recommendation for users who wanted Chromium-engine browsing without the Chrome version of Manifest V3 restrictions.
The privacy audits of Brave have been infrequent. The browser has not had the kind of regular independent security audit cycle that ProtonMail or Tor Browser maintain.
What I think now
Brave is still a defensible browser for a specific user. It is not the obvious answer for the privacy-purist user, who should pick Mullvad Browser. It is not the right answer for users who want simplicity above all, who should pick a current Firefox with sane settings.
Brave is the right answer for users who want a Chromium-engine browser with strong default tracker blocking, are not specifically opposed to having a cryptocurrency wallet built in (you can ignore it), and value the slight performance and ecosystem advantages of Chromium-based over Firefox-based.
The arguments I made in 2023 for not recommending Brave to non-technical users still mostly hold. The interface still has crypto-adjacent prompts that confuse less-technical users. The product direction is still oriented toward expanding the surface area beyond reading the web. The brand alignment with privacy is still less institutional than Mullvad Browser’s.
But the absolute concerns about Brave have softened. The product has not gone in a clearly worse direction. The crypto features have not become more obnoxious. The privacy fundamentals have stayed solid.
For users who use Brave today and like it, the 2022 case for switching away has weakened.
For users choosing a new browser today, Brave is one of several reasonable options rather than the obvious right answer.
Specific situations
For a non-technical user wanting a simple browser that blocks ads by default: Brave still works fine. The crypto features can be ignored or disabled in settings.
For a privacy-focused user willing to switch to Firefox-based: Mullvad Browser is a more aligned choice than Brave.
For a developer who values Chromium devtools and wants Chromium engine without Chrome: Brave is a reasonable Chromium choice. Vivaldi is the alternative.
For a user already on Brave who is happy with it: stay. The reasons to switch have weakened.
For a user who specifically wants to support a privacy-mission-driven company: Brave is somewhere in the middle. Brave Software is a real company with real privacy investments, but the corporate alignment with pure privacy has crypto-shaped complications. Mullvad and Proton are more clearly mission-aligned.
What we are watching going forward
Brave’s ad-supported revenue model has interesting structural properties (users opt in to ads in exchange for BAT rewards). Whether this scales to a sustainable business model that does not require degrading the user experience is an open question. So far, the company has not gone in clearly bad directions.
The Manifest V3 transition continues to play out. If Brave continues to handle this better than Chrome, the case for Brave over Chrome strengthens.
Brave Search’s evolution will affect Brave’s overall position. If Brave Search becomes a more central part of the product (and Brave the company increasingly resembles a search-engine company), the browser direction will shift accordingly.
The crypto-features arc is still ongoing. If Web3 and BAT-style payment models become more relevant to web usage, Brave’s early bet pays off. If they fade, Brave’s investment in those features becomes a sunk cost that the company has to maintain or remove.
A specific recommendation
For most users today: Mullvad Browser if you want privacy-first, Firefox-based, no-crypto. Brave if you want Chromium-engine with tracker blocking and you can ignore the crypto features. Standard Firefox with privacy add-ons if you want the most flexible Firefox experience.
The 2022 case for actively recommending against Brave has softened. The current case is more nuanced: Brave is fine for the right user, not the obvious default.
Brave | Mullvad Browser | LibreWolf
Related: I recommended Brave for years, I’m not anymore, Mullvad Browser long-term review, LibreWolf versus Mullvad Browser