How the scores are arrived at

Every platform on this site carries a score out of ten. The score is not a summary of how the editor feels; it is the weighted output of four criteria, applied identically to all five platforms. This page states them so a reader can disagree with the weights rather than with the conclusion.

The four criteria

Cost to run a real campaign — 40%. Not the headline price. The price of the cheapest plan on which you can publish to your own domain, receive the traffic you actually expect, and split it between two variants. A platform whose entry tier cannot do all three is scored on the tier that can.

What the meter measures — 25%. Every vendor here limits something: visits, unique visitors, domains, active pages. This criterion asks whether the limit matches how the product is used. A visit cap punishes success. A domain cap punishes breadth. Neither is wrong, but one of them will be wrong for you.

Honesty of the pricing page — 20%. Whether tier boundaries are stated plainly, whether the feature that gates the product is visible before checkout, and whether the annual and monthly rates are both shown. A vendor that advertises a price for a plan nobody can use loses points here regardless of how good the software is.

Editor and publishing — 15%. The smallest weight, deliberately. The page editors in this category converged years ago and the differences between them are matters of taste. A tool that publishes to a domain, captures a form and fires a conversion event is doing the job; beyond that, preference decides.

What the score ignores

Conversion performance. No score on this site rewards a platform for making pages that convert better, because there is no way to establish that from outside. Conversion rate is determined by the offer, the traffic source and the audience’s intent long before the page tool gets a vote, and published lift figures from vendor case studies describe one company’s one campaign.

Load time. Several vendors here make speed claims and one of them is architecturally specific about it. Those claims are reported as the vendors’ claims and are never restated as measurements, because measuring them properly would need controlled conditions this site does not have.

Template counts. A number that is trivially inflated and describes nothing.

The rule about figures

No price appears anywhere on this site unless it was read off the vendor’s own pricing page, and every page that quotes one states the date it was read. Third-party pricing aggregators are not used as sources, because this category reprices often enough that most of them are describing a product that no longer exists — during 2026 one vendor in the ranking replaced its entire plan ladder, and a good deal of published coverage still lists the old one.

Where a figure could not be confirmed at the vendor, it is either softened in the copy or left out. It is never estimated.

Re-reading

Prices are re-read on a schedule and the date on the page is the date of the last reading, not the date the page was written. If you find a figure that has drifted, the contact page is the fastest way to have it corrected. The full list of what is being tracked sits behind the best landing page builders ranking, which is where every re-reading lands first.