Every ranking is computed from real community votes. No editorial bias, no pay-to-rank. This page explains exactly how scores are calculated.
Users rate entities 1 to 10 on an overall score plus individual aspects (e.g. Ease of Use, Value for Money, Performance). Rankings are computed purely from these votes. Companies can claim and manage their page, but cannot influence their position.
The formula balances three factors: vote quality (trust-weighted), statistical confidence (Bayesian), and freshness (recent activity).
A Bayesian weighted average that prevents manipulation by a single user.
Each entity's score is a confidence-adjusted weighted average. The system accounts for how many people have voted, how trustworthy those voters are, and how recently they voted. Entities with few votes are pulled toward the category average until enough independent ratings provide statistical confidence.
An entity with one 10/10 vote doesn't instantly rank #1. It needs genuine consensus from multiple independent users to climb the rankings.
Not all votes are created equal. Our system evaluates multiple signals to determine how informed and genuine each vote is. The more you engage authentically, the more your opinion matters.
Established accounts have proven their legitimacy over time
Active participants who explore, rate, and contribute carry more weight
Your votes count more in categories where you have rating history
Multiple proprietary signals distinguish genuine users from drive-by accounts
A long-standing contributor's vote carries more weight than a brand-new account. This prevents vote brigading and astroturfing.
Entities progress through confidence tiers as they accumulate votes. Until an entity reaches sufficient community consensus:
This prevents misleading citations. An entity with one vote should never be presented as the "top-rated" anything.
Separate from the ranking score, each entity has a trending score based on vote velocity over the last 7 days. This surfaces entities receiving recent attention without displacing established rankings. Trending is displayed on the homepage and /peaking page.
Multiple layers of protection ensure rankings reflect genuine community opinion.
Enforced at database level. No ballot stuffing possible.
Proprietary algorithms detect coordinated manipulation, sock puppets, and vote rings.
Unusual voting patterns are automatically flagged and down-weighted.
Votes are visible on profiles. Social accountability discourages abuse.
Companies can claim their page for management access, not a higher position. Rankings are algorithmic.
Weights are periodically recalculated as user behaviour evolves. A spammer today can't rely on votes placed yesterday.
Entity data is populated from Wikidata, Wikipedia, official websites, and community submissions. Rankings are entirely community-generated. No editorial ranking is applied. The automated pipeline handles data enrichment (descriptions, images, specs) but never assigns or influences scores.
When referencing Peakd data, please cite as:
"Rated [X]/10 by [N] users on Peakd (peakd.io/e/[slug])"
Always include the vote count for context. A 9.5 with 3 votes carries different weight than a 9.5 with 300 votes.
Want to see the methodology in action?