How we rank creators on this site

The five things we score

Each is scored 0–2 by an editor from the creator’s public page. The total is shown as “Our rating” on a 0–10 scale with the date it was last checked, and colour-banded: 8 and above is Excellent, 6 to 8 Good, 4 to 6 Fair, below 4 Poor. None of the five is about how someone looks.

• •Value for money — the subscription price against the size of the library you get for it, using the photo and video counts on the public counter. This one is pure arithmetic and the rule is fixed: on a paid page, public posts per dollar of monthly price — 200 or more scores 2, 60 or more scores 1, less scores 0; on a free-to-follow page, 800 or more public posts scores 2, 300 or more scores 1. A $5 page with 1,000 posts scores higher than a $20 page with 1,000. The thresholds sit at the directory’s tertiles, so each band holds about a third of pages. They were last set on 8 October 2026, on 14,843 pages (the median paid page offers about 109 posts per dollar, the median free page about 500 posts). The first thresholds, set on 20 September 2026 on 850 large pages (400 / 150 posts per dollar and 3,000 / 1,000 posts), gave six pages in ten a zero once the directory grew to include smaller pages — a band that holds most pages tells a reader nothing, in either direction. They are re-checked once a year and changed only with a dated note here.
• •Activity — how much the page actually adds, judged from its public post count sampled over time. The rule is fixed: eight or more posts added in the last 30 days scores 2 (roughly twice a week or better); at least one post in the last 90 days scores 1; a page we have observed with nothing in 90 days scores 0. Each profile shows the posts per month for the last year, the last date the count rose, and the date we read it.
• •Clarity — whether the page tells you what you are paying for: what the subscription includes, what is pay-per-view, whether customs and messages are offered and at what price. A pinned menu counts for a lot.
• •Responsiveness — whether the creator says she answers messages, and whether there are public signs that she does (replies under posts, a stated reply window). We cannot see private conversations; we score the public signals.
• •Consistency of identity — whether the page, the linked social accounts and the public posts describe the same person, location and offer. A page that says one thing on Instagram and another on the subscription page scores lower. A location alone is not a cross-check: it scores 1, and 2 needs something checkable that agrees with it (a verifiable name, a public channel, a career that can be looked up). We corrected this on 8 October 2026: an earlier rule gave 2 to 46 pages for a country field alone, which put 13 of them at 10.0. On 9 October 2026 we went further: a 2 now has to be explained by the note itself — a named career or credit, a public channel, a brand — and 1,812 pages whose note did not show what could be checked went from 2 to 1.

What we do not score

• •Appearance, body or age. Ever. The taxonomy on this site has no body-type categories for the same reason.
• •Content we have not seen. We do not subscribe to every page; we score what is public. When a page is free to follow we say so, because that is the cheapest way for you to check it yourself.
• •Popularity by itself. Likes and follower counts are shown as facts, not as a score. A big number tells you a page is well known, not that it is worth your money.

Provisional ratings

Every rating says how many criteria it rests on — “on 4 of 5 criteria” — and the breakdown names the missing one. A rating is marked provisional when one of the two measured criteria is still missing: value needs the price and the library counts, activity needs the post count observed over time. Those two are arithmetic and are scored the moment we have the numbers; when the activity series arrives, the label comes off. Responsiveness is different: a bio that says nothing about replies is not evidence that she does not reply, so that criterion stays unassessed rather than scored zero, and the rating is computed on the criteria that could be assessed. We changed this on 20 September 2026 after finding that an earlier version scored silence as zero, which pulled hundreds of ratings down for no reason; the correction is noted here because a method that changes quietly is not a method.

A rating needs at least one measured criterion. If neither value nor activity can be measured yet, the judged criteria are recorded but no total is published: the profile says “not rated yet” until a number arrives. Three judgement calls alone once produced a 10.0 — on a profile that works with this site — and a rating that rests on no number is an opinion, not a rating. Decided on 8 October 2026.

The “Highest rated right now” list on the homepage shows complete ratings only — both measured criteria present and at least three of five assessed — and leaves out profiles whose public name does not fit a page that speaks for the whole site. Those profiles keep their rating and their place in every category ranking; only the homepage list is narrower. Decided on 8 October 2026.

Where do the numbers come from? The price, photo, video and like counts are read from public listings of the creator’s own page and dated. The post count over time comes from public metrics sites that sample the counter every few days; we record the posts added in the last 30 and 90 days and the last sample on which the count rose. Those counts are minimums: the counter shows the net change, and a creator who removes old posts can hide new ones behind the drop. So a falling count never reads as zero activity on its own — we count only what the dated rises prove (at least one post when the count rose inside the window), and the profile says “at least” and why. We changed this on 8 October 2026, after a page that had posted ten days before the check was shown as dormant because its count had fallen. When two sources disagree on the price, the profile shows both figures with their dates rather than picking one.

Each profile shows the breakdown, criterion by criterion, so you can see which ones were assessed and what each scored. A rating we cannot explain line by line is not one we publish.

Ranked lists put more evidence first. The order uses the rating with one neutral criterion added — scored 1 of 2 — so at equal scores the rating that rests on more criteria ranks higher, and a perfect score on two criteria ranks level with 9.0 on all five rather than above it. The number shown on each profile is never adjusted; only the order is. Decided on 8 October 2026, when most ratings in the directory were still provisional.

What “Featured” means

Some creators are marked Featured. It means the creator has claimed her profile, supplied her own photos and information, and works with the people who run this site — either as a client of theirs or because she has paid for placement. Links from a Featured profile may be tracked so she can see where her subscribers come from.

Featured profiles are labelled on every page where they appear, and the label is never removed in exchange for anything. Featured does not change Our rating: a Featured creator can score 4/10, and it will say 4/10. On ranked lists, Featured profiles are shown in their own block, not inside the ranking table.

Corrections and removal

• •If you are a creator and something on your profile is wrong, claim the profile and correct it yourself — no identity documents are required, only a code in your public bio.
• •If you would rather not be listed, use the takedown form. We remove profiles on request, within 48 hours, without asking why.
• •If you are a subscriber and a page does not match what we wrote, tell us through the contact page. We re-check and update the date.

Why bother

Most “best creators” lists are either paid placements pretending to be rankings, or pages generated to catch a search and send you anywhere. We would rather tell you what a page costs, how big it is, how active it is and what it promises — and let you decide. That is the whole method.