Compare Yale Assure Lock 2 Smart Lock vs Lockly Secure Plus Smart Lock

Support was a weak point in one long-term review, where Yale helped resolve some issues but did not solve or replace the fingerprint problem.

Warranty evidence is strongly positive, with Digital Trends calling it one of the best in the smart-lock market.

Remote access was a major strength: reviewers valued checking status, controlling the lock away from home, and getting peace of mind from anywhere.

Remote access is a repeated limitation because the lock lacks built-in internet control and needs extra Wi-Fi hardware.

Smart-home integration was broad and often praised across HomeKit, Alexa, Google, Matter/module plans, and other ecosystems, though Home Key and Android/Wear OS gaps created caveats.

Smart-home integration is one of the clearest weaknesses, with repeated criticism of missing or limited platform support.

Battery life was one of the weakest areas, especially with Wi-Fi models, with complaints about short life, limited battery visibility, and frequent replacement concerns.

Battery evidence is limited to one long-term review, but that reviewer called performance stellar after about a year of use.

Notifications were useful for access, auto-lock, and ajar alerts, but some reviewers wanted earlier low-battery warnings or reported missing/annoying alerts.

Notifications are a weakness in the limited evidence, with PCMag specifically missing push notification support.

Voice control generally worked and added convenience, but security restrictions and PIN requirements limited how seamless it felt.

Voice control is limited because it is not built in and depends on extra Wi-Fi hardware that reviewers criticized.

Module-based connectivity and reduced bridge requirements were viewed as flexible strengths, though some features still required a paid module or the right protocol.

The hub requirement is a drawback because remote and voice features require added hardware and cost.

The touchscreen looked clean and worked well at night or in cold weather, but direct sunlight visibility was a repeated weakness.

The touchscreen evidence is positive, with reviewers praising seamless operation and responsive keypad behavior.

Auto-lock and auto-unlock were useful conveniences for many reviewers, but reliability depended on DoorSense behavior, proximity logic, and reviewer preference for location tracking.

Auto-lock has limited but strong evidence, with PCMag reporting that the feature worked very well in testing.

Value was mixed: reviewers liked the feature range and some found it affordable or worth it on sale, while others considered it pricey or questioned add-on costs.

Value is a common concern because reviewers repeatedly describe the lock, hub path, or overall package as expensive.

Guest codes were one of the most consistently praised features, especially temporary, scheduled, unlimited, or child-friendly access options.

Guest access is mixed: several reviewers liked the flexible access options, while one found temporary-code delivery convoluted and buggy.

Fingerprint performance split sharply: several reviewers praised quick, accurate recognition, while one long-term reviewer reported persistent failures that undermined the feature.

Fingerprint access is the strongest feature across reviews, described as fast, accurate, responsive, effective, and unusually good.

Bluetooth performance was positive when direct and local, but one reviewer found waiting for Bluetooth/Wi-Fi switching frustrating in real use.

Bluetooth evidence is positive, with stable connectivity and unusually quick app response over Bluetooth range.

User management was strong overall, with app users, entry codes, schedules, and guest controls praised for families, visitors, and rental scenarios.

User access management is mixed, combining flexible access options with one strong complaint about difficult PIN assignment.

The app was often described as simple or easy to follow, but reviewers also reported slow loading, antiquated design, connectivity frustrations, and setup hiccups.

The app was generally considered easy, clear, and responsive, though one review separated that from a difficult guest-code workflow.

Door fit was mostly workable on standard doors, though reviewers stressed measuring carefully and one reviewer found their dimensions did not match at a first install location.

Compatibility evidence is positive but limited, with reviewers noting standard-door fit and successful single-doorknob replacement.

Keypad impressions were mixed: reviewers liked responsive, readable, and kid-friendly entry, but disliked sunlight readability problems and extra taps to wake the screen.

The keypad and PIN Genie concept were widely praised for security and usability, although one reviewer found the shifting layout disorienting.

Security features drew mixed-to-positive reactions, including two-factor setup, encryption, keypad lockout, and backup-key tradeoffs.

Security evidence is positive, with praise for hack resistance and unusually comprehensive account-security setup.

Backup entry options were valued, including physical keys on keyed models and 9V battery contacts on key-free models, especially as protection against dead batteries.

Key backup evidence is positive, with reviewers valuing physical-key and backup access as a practical fallback.

Core lock reliability was mostly strong, with many reviewers reporting smooth or problem-free operation, though some long-term and connectivity-related issues softened the consensus.

Locking reliability is mixed: some testing found smooth, great performance, while Digital Trends encountered unresolved calibration errors.

Wi-Fi added valuable remote control and ecosystem support, but reviewers repeatedly connected it with battery drain, slow or spotty connectivity, and setup annoyances.

Wi-Fi is mixed: the lack of built-in Wi-Fi is criticized, but one review found hub-connected Wi-Fi response very fast.

Weather-related impressions were positive where tested or judged, including cold-climate touchscreen use and confidence that the lock could withstand the elements.

Weather resistance evidence is positive but limited to one review that judged the casing able to handle harsh conditions.

Most reviewers found installation manageable or easy, helped by app guidance and templates, but several called out door measurements, DoorSense drilling, cable routing, or calibration as potential friction.

Installation is sharply mixed, ranging from simple, app-guided, and quick to unusually complicated and frustrating.

Build and design earned broad praise for a sleek, premium, sturdy feel, though a few reviewers found the interior bulk or thumb-turn construction less appealing.

Build quality was repeatedly praised as sturdy, well-built, strong, and rock solid.

The locking mechanism was viewed positively, with smooth, quiet, solid operation and audible confirmation highlighted across reviews.

Motor evidence is limited, but PCMag praised the lock for relatively quiet operation.

Access logs were consistently useful, letting reviewers track who locked, unlocked, or entered and helping families or hosts monitor activity.

Reviewers who discussed logs liked the recordkeeping, citing accurate history entries and even a year of usable activity history.

Lock/unlock speed was generally strong, with reviewers describing quick keypad response, fast auto-unlock behavior, and instant fingerprint unlocking.

Lock and unlock speed was consistently positive, with instant app response or unlocks taking only a couple of seconds.

Backset flexibility was a clear limitation in one review, which said the lock was not an option for a longer-than-average backset.

DoorSense was useful for knowing door status and enabling safer auto-lock behavior, but installation, appearance, and occasional calibration behavior were recurring caveats.

The matte screen finish drew praise for reducing visible finger smudges, which reviewers treated as a useful security and appearance benefit.

Geofencing and auto-unlock were convenient when they worked, but reviewers disliked fixed radius limits, constant location access, or privacy/battery implications.

Design opinions are mixed: reviewers liked the attractive, premium look, but several also called the lock large, bulky, or obvious.

Physical attack resistance impressions were positive where discussed, especially for the key-free model and reviewers’ sense that the lock felt tough.

Two-factor authentication was explicitly praised as part of the app’s account security requirements.