How we review dating sites

No made-up dates, no invented memberships and no claims that our editors used an app when they didn't. We prefer a clear desk review to an impressive-sounding story that cannot be verified.

What goes into a profile

We begin with the service's publicly described purpose: whom it says it is built for, how it introduces people and what sets the experience apart from a general-purpose dating site. Next, we look at the questions a reader should ask before joining: region, relationship goals, subscription rules, privacy settings, identity checks and the feasibility of meeting someone in person.

How we form an editorial view

Our selections are qualitative, not laboratory rankings. A site can be a good fit for a particular audience without being the “best” service in the abstract. We describe the appeal and the compromise together. We do not publish numerical star ratings without an evidence-based scoring program.

What we have not tested

Our initial library comprises publicly informed editorial profiles, not hands-on account trials, paid subscription experiments, interviews with real members or security audits. We do not assert that profiles are real, that a service is safe from scams, or that it has a certain number of active members locally.

Updates and corrections

Dating products change quickly. A provider can alter prices, features, availability or ownership after publication. Each article shows a true publication date and links to the provider's official site. If you find an error, let us know through the contact page.

How we handle commercial links

At launch, the provider buttons link to official sites rather than affiliate destinations. If commissionable links are introduced, we will disclose that relationship prominently near relevant recommendations and on this page. Payment will not be presented as a test result or as a fact about quality.