The matrix of capabilities of modern messengers with an emphasis on security

Hi,% Username%!

I decided to make a table of the features of modern instant messengers with an eye on security and the threshold of entry. Perhaps someone will help make the choice of a suitable tool for communication.
About what I did - under the cut.

Features / Messenger	End-to-end encryption	Encrypted grouping	Desktop client with encryption	Encrypted voice calls	Need a server	Id
Telegram	Yes, you need to separately create a secure chat.	To the server (Durov can read)	Cutegram	Not	Yes	Tel. number, nickname
Signalal	Yes (mobile only)	Yes (mobile only)	not yet	Yes	Yes	Tel. number
Tox	Yes	Yes (desktop only yet)	Yes	Yes + group	Not	Public key, you need a different on each instance
Whatsapp	It seems like yes (Android only)	Not	Https	?	Yes	Tel. number
Skype	No, the FSB has access	Not	To server	Not	Yes	Login
Viber	No, the FSB has access	Not	To server	?	Yes	Tel. number
Jabber + otr (Pidgin, ChatSecure)	Yes	Not	Yes	Not	Yes	Login

Remarks

• At Telegram, by default, encryption is only up to the server, and there is only trust in Durov. Secret chat need to be cut in separately.
• WhatsApp seems to have screwed up the same encryption as in Signal, but there are no details and it seems to work only on androids
• Signal is the most secure of convenient non-anonymous instant messengers, but there is no desktop client. Actively sawing web extension for chrome. I advise you to look closely. Low entry threshold.
• Tox - the future is his, but for now he is very raw. And you need to generate as much Id as you have at the same time devices on the network, otherwise it will be buggy. But he only has anonymous group encrypted voice conferencing (if the client does not fly out)
• Jabber + OTR. excellent security but high entry threshold with lots of settings
• Viber, Skype - only if you don't mind that the organs read your conversations almost in real time.

UPD
Here is another good comparison sign.