Independent Rankings, Rebuilt After Every LegitBoosters Audit

Send us the paperwork. A buyer who shows an order ID, a chat transcript, or a refund thread that contradicts what our own run of orders produced gets that service re-opened: one credible report is logged against the record, a repeated pattern gets the score recalculated at the next monthly pass. Complaints with no purchase behind them we still read, but they never move a number on their own.

Lower than most first-time buyers expect at the single-division end, and steeply higher once you cross into the top ranks, where the work stops scaling in a straight line. Our sweeps record what the checkout screen actually charges each month rather than what the landing page promises. Printing one fixed floor on this page would go stale before the next audit, so the price column on each service page carries the current figure.

Five weighted inputs, identical for every service we cover: account protection at 35%, delivery reliability and speed at 25%, transparent pricing at 15%, real buyer sentiment at 15%, support experience at 10%. Totals fall into one of four bands - 90-100 Excellent, 75-89 Good, 60-74 Fair, anything below 60 Poor. Those weights were fixed before the first order was ever placed, and nobody has touched them since.

No publisher signs off on account sharing, and any seller claiming otherwise has already told you something worth knowing about itself. Penalties in practice run from a queue restriction up to a permanent closure, and they track how the work was handled: a booster logging in from another continent on a visible session draws scrutiny that the same booster on a properly routed connection with the session hidden simply does not. That asymmetry is why account protection carries the heaviest weight we assign.

On a marketplace you are choosing a seller yourself and carrying the counterparty risk that comes with it - your own vetting, escrow if it exists, and the dispute when things go sideways. A service takes the order, assigns the booster and owns whatever happens next, so a bad handoff is theirs to repair. Honest operators exist under both models. Eloboss came through the checks clean on the parts a buyer can rarely verify alone: written refund terms readable before you hand over money, and one accountable party when a timeline slips.

No, and the arrangement is deliberately built so you can test that claim rather than trust it. Weights are published, the evidence behind each score is orders we funded ourselves, and the same arithmetic is re-run across all 78 services on every monthly pass - the most recent one closed July 1, 2026. Some outbound links pay us a commission. None of them touch an input, and a service that stumbles on delivery drops regardless of what it does or does not pay us.