- Home
- How We Score
What Goes Into a BoostersReviews Trust Score
Every score on this site begins with an order somebody here paid for. Card details, checkout screen, live chat, the wait - we go through all of it the way a reader would, and the running count now stands at 328 paid test orders across the services we cover. The whole set is re-audited once a month, and the most recent pass closed on July 12, 2026. No service pays to appear here, pays to move up, or pays to have a finding softened.
What the Score Is Made Of
A Trust Score runs from 0 to 100 and falls out of five weighted inputs that stay identical for every service in the index. Nobody gets a bespoke formula. Account handling carries the heaviest weight for a plain reason: every other kind of failure leaves you a way back. Money comes back through a refund, a late finish costs patience and nothing more, yet a login that gets flagged often stays flagged. Delivery, pricing, feedback and support each take something from you when they fail, though the account itself usually survives them.
| Factor | Weight | What goes into it |
|---|---|---|
| How your account is handled | 35% | Whether the service goes offline or appear-offline without being nagged into it, whether play is routed through the region the account normally signs in from, how login details are stored and who inside the company can read them, how candidly the site describes the terms-of-service risk it is asking you to carry, and what happens to that access after delivery. |
| Getting the order done | 25% | Did the orders we bought actually complete, did delivery land inside the promised window, and did work begin when the service said it would. We log every pause, every hand-off to a second player, and every case where the delivered result drifted from what the order page described. |
| Pricing transparency | 15% | The figure on the payment screen has to match the figure advertised. We sweep prices across ranks and regions to catch quiet mark-ups, look for charges that surface only at the final step, and check whether refund conditions exist in writing somewhere a buyer can find them before any money moves. |
| Verified customer feedback | 15% | Feedback counts once we can tie it to a real purchase. We strip out astroturf, watch how a company answers people who complain in public, and weigh the shape of the record above its volume: fifty consistent accounts of a slow start tell us more than four thousand five-word raves. |
| Support responsiveness | 10% | We open real tickets as a paying customer, time the replies, and judge whether the answers are competent or merely scripted. Somewhere in that exchange we drop an inconvenient question on everyone we test, typically a refund query or a scope change halfway through the job, since scripted courtesy falls apart the moment nobody has a line prepared for it. |
Our Verification Work
- Bought With Our Money. Nobody on the masthead accepts a free boost. All 328 orders behind these scores went through on our own cards, and each one carries a timestamped log: the checkout page, the confirmation mail, the first message from whoever picked up the work, every status change along the way, and a closing capture of the account. That record is what we reopen when a service disputes a line.
- The Cleanup Pass. After delivery is confirmed we go back into the account and look at what was left behind: live sessions, the sign-in history and which regions show up in it, linked devices, and anything touched that had nothing to do with the job. We reset credentials from our side and time how quickly the service drops its own access. A login left open for days costs points here, whether or not anything bad came of it.
- Auditing Public Feedback. Reviews get their own pass before any of them reach the 15% weight. We hunt for bursts - thirty glowing entries inside two days after a silent month - along with near-identical phrasing across accounts, reviewers with one lifetime post, and clusters that arrive suspiciously soon after bad press. What clears the filter feeds the score. What does not gets written up in the review itself, so readers can judge the pattern on their own.
What the Tiers Mean
Anything from 90 up we call Excellent, 75 to 89 lands as Good, 60 to 74 as Fair, and anything under 60 goes down as Poor - a label we hand out more often than the industry would like.
Why Placements Are Not for Sale
Placement on this site is not for sale, and every order in that count came out of our own budget. Four rules keep it that way:
- Positions in the ranking cannot be bought at any price, and no amount of correspondence gets a documented finding pulled off a page.
- When we get something wrong and can confirm it, the fix goes on the page in public with a date attached, never as a quiet overnight edit.
- Affiliate links exist and they pay for the orders, but whoever sets a score neither knows nor cares which listings carry one. Commercial terms have no route into the weights or the running order.
- A service reads its review at the same moment you do. We send no drafts for approval and take no pre-publication calls about a number.
Who We Are
Alex Monroe runs this site as Managing Editor. He has worked as a freelance esports journalist covering the grey market around ranked play since 2019, back when most of the trade lived in forum threads and private Discord servers. He pays for the orders he writes about, names the sites that stall rather than burying them in a footnote, and personally drives the monthly re-audit that keeps the 328-order count and every score current.
Tell Us What Is Wrong
We get things wrong sometimes, and I would rather hear about it than let it sit: send the page link and the disputed line to amend@boostersreviews.com. Every claim gets checked against the order logs and the timestamps from the relevant test run before a word on the page moves.