Botox vs Dysport vs Xeomin vs Daxxify
Units do not convert one to one between these products, which makes per unit price comparison close to meaningless. Here is what actually differs.
Written by Ben Tracy, MD, physician injector, Draper and Lehi, Utah. Last reviewed September 13, 2026.
All four relax muscle the same way. What differs is how their units are counted, how quickly they take effect, how long they last, and how far they spread from the injection point. The unit difference is the one that costs people money, because units do not convert one to one and per unit prices are therefore not comparable across products.
The unit problem, stated plainly
A unit is not a universal measure. It is defined per product, by that manufacturer, against their own potency assay. So one unit of one product is simply not the same quantity of effect as one unit of another.
| Product | Units relative to Botox | What that means for price |
|---|---|---|
| Botox | 1 | The reference everyone quotes against. |
| Xeomin | About 1 to 1 | Per unit prices are broadly comparable to Botox. |
| Jeuveau | About 1 to 1 | Broadly comparable to Botox per unit. |
| Dysport | Roughly 2.5 to 3 | You need roughly two and a half to three Dysport units for one Botox unit. A lower per unit price here is expected, not a saving. |
| Daxxify | Its own scale | Approved at 40 units for the glabella, against 20 for Botox. Again, not comparable per unit. |
The practical consequence. If one clinic quotes you a per unit price for Dysport and another quotes for Botox, comparing those two numbers tells you almost nothing. Ask for the price of treating the area, not the price of a unit.
Onset and duration
Dysport is commonly described as taking effect slightly faster, often reported within two to three days against three to five for Botox. In practice the difference is small enough that it rarely decides anything.
Duration for all of the traditional products clusters around three to four months. Daxxify was studied with a longer duration claim, with trial data reporting a median effect considerably beyond that for some patients, though individual experience varies widely and it has not displaced the others in routine use.
Spread, and why it matters at the brow
Products differ in how far the effect travels from where the needle went. Dysport in particular is often described as having a wider field of effect.
In most of the face this is a minor consideration. Around the brow it is not, because a few millimeters of unintended spread into the muscle that lifts the brow is the difference between a good result and a heavy one. Spread is a reason to choose a product for a particular face and a particular area, not a ranking of better and worse.
This is the part of the comparison that almost every page online leaves out, and it is the part that actually connects product choice to how you will look. It is also why I plan the upper face as one system rather than area by area.
The protein question
Xeomin is manufactured without the accessory proteins the others carry. The theoretical argument is that fewer proteins mean less chance of the immune system learning to neutralise the toxin over years of treatment.
The evidence level here is worth being honest about. True clinical resistance is uncommon, and most people convinced they have become resistant were underdosed or treated at intervals too short. It is a reasonable consideration for a long term patient, not a reason for most people to switch.
So which should you have?
For most patients this matters far less than who is holding the needle and where they put it. The honest ranking of what determines your result is placement first, dose second, product third, and the gap between first and third is large.
General information, not medical advice, and not a substitute for assessment. Individual anatomy and product response vary, so nothing here predicts your result.