Methodology
Our full, transparent method for scoring and comparing providers — including the rubric weights and how we handle unknown facts.
Principles
Every score and comparison on this site is built from disclosed, verifiable facts. We never invent figures such as prices or pool sizes. Where a provider does not publicly state a fact, we mark it “Not publicly disclosed”, and that field earns zero points — it is never guessed. This means a provider that documents itself thoroughly will tend to score better on evidence completeness, which is by design: transparency is something buyers should be able to reward.
The scoring rubric
We evaluate each provider across eight weighted dimensions. Each dimension is scored only from disclosed facts, then combined using the weights below.
| Dimension | Weight |
|---|---|
| Network & targeting fit | 20% |
| Rotation / session control | 15% |
| Pricing transparency & flexibility | 15% |
| Protocols, auth & integrations | 15% |
| Support & buyer experience | 10% |
| Ethics, consent & compliance transparency | 15% |
| Trial / refund & risk reduction | 5% |
| Data freshness & disclosure quality | 5% |
What the score means
The score is a decision-support value, not a lab performance benchmark. A higher score indicates a provider discloses more of the facts that matter for a confident buying decision, weighted by importance. Where a provider discloses too few facts for a reliable score, we label it “Insufficient evidence” rather than publishing a falsely precise number.
Confidence levels
Alongside the score we publish a confidence level — High, Medium, or Limited — based on how many key fields are disclosed. Confidence tells you how much weight to place on the score itself.
Comparisons
Head-to-head comparisons are generated deterministically from the same disclosed facts. We never declare an absolute winner, because the right provider depends on your workload. Instead we show side-by-side facts, explain which provider suits which needs, and flag where facts are undisclosed or where units are not directly comparable.
Verification and review
Facts carry review dates and are re-checked on a quarterly cycle. When we verify a volatile fact, we record a source and a verification date. Until then, the fact is shown as not disclosed. Providers whose current status is uncertain are marked “verification pending” and are not ranked as if active.
Corrections
If you believe a fact is wrong or out of date, please tell us — see our corrections policy. We would rather fix an error quickly than defend it.
Independence
Affiliate relationships, where they exist, are disclosed and never affect scores, rankings, or verdicts. See our affiliate disclosure.