Anomaly detection, LOF vs IsolationForest I have  a training dataset with 140 000 instances with 140 features. Due to the scale of the dataset I'm experiment with letting a model do the anomaly detection and have tried LocalOutlierFactor and IsolationForest. I did not performed any hyperparameter tuning, just executed the functions from sklearn.
lof=LocalOutlierFactor()
yhat=lof.fit_predict(features)

isofor=IsolationForest(n_estimators=100).fit(features)
isolated_instances = iso_f.predict(features)

LOF identified 13 000 outliers and Isolation Forest found 4 000. This discrepancy is of course something I started to think about. Since I'm new to this field of machine learning I wonder how I should think when I fit an anomaly detection model. Is it something I should bear in mind?  How can I asses the performance when it's unsupervised? Is it if prediction on test set further down the road is improving? Or is there other methods?

First note, that both methods create outlier scores, and such an ordering of the data is often more useful than a simple assignment of a binary value. You should rather assign a threshold for the score yourself.
Second, the defaults are rarely a good choice for individual situations, so you should experiment with them. For that, of course, you need some notion of "performance". You mentioned "prediction on test set further down the road", which sounds like a very good candidate.
