Methodology - How We Research and Rank

Data first, prose second

Every provider entry is a structured fact set: provider type, pricing per term, trial and money-back terms, the eight tracked streaming services (yes / partial / no / untested), documented device support, IP registration and dynamic-DNS handling, logging policy, reputation notes and sources with dates. Reviews are AI-drafted from that fact set only - the model may not invent numbers, services or history. Drafts are fact-checked against the database before publication, and every fact row carries a verification date.

Where facts come from

Provider channel lists, pricing and terms pages, setup documentation, community reports and our own checks. Quality is flagged per provider: verified, reported or unverified. Unverified facts are labeled in reviews, never presented as confirmed. "Partial" on a service means documented restrictions - the review explains which.

Scoring

Editorial scores (0-10) are weighted: coverage 22%, reliability 20%, value 14%, speed 12%, devices 12%, support 10%, privacy 10%. A two-service specialist is scored within its own lane - it cannot "lose" for catalog size against a 300-channel provider; it is rated on what it is. User ratings are shown separately, smoothed with a statistical prior, and never mixed into editorial scores.

Freshness

Unblock support changes fast - streaming services fight back constantly. We run daily reachability checks on every listed domain and regenerate reviews on a weekly cycle (plus on-demand whenever facts change). Every review shows its version, generation date and fact-verification date.

Independence

Commercial relationships never influence scores, ranks or the discontinued list. Providers can submit factual corrections with sources via contact; we verify and correct within 7 days. We do not remove dead or discontinued listings in exchange for anything.