How we rank assignment help services
The same sequence runs for every provider, in the same order, with the weights fixed before the first order is placed. Nothing about a provider’s advertising enters the score.
The testing sequence
Shortlist
A provider enters the pool if students in our five markets can order from it, it publishes prices, and it has been trading for at least twelve months.
Anonymous orders
Two paid orders in different subjects, from student accounts, at full price. We never accept free or discounted work for review.
Blind marking
Two assessors mark each deliverable against a rubric with the provider's name removed, and we scan originality independently.
Support stress test
Three contacts at different hours, including one genuine problem, timed from message sent to problem resolved.
Refund claim
We file a real claim on one order and record the outcome, the window, the evidence demanded and the days to money back.
Publish and re-check
Scores publish with the evidence attached. Prices are re-quoted monthly; the full sequence repeats twice a year.
The twelve weighted criteria
Weights total 100%. Pricing and quality carry the most because they are what a student actually buys; security and value act as tie-breakers.
| Criterion | Weight | What we measure |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing | 14% | Delivered price per page after every add-on, surcharge and forced extra. |
| Quality | 14% | Blind rubric marks for argument, accuracy, structure, referencing and brief compliance. |
| Originality | 12% | Independent similarity scan, plus whether a report is included or upsold. |
| Customer support | 10% | First-response time, hours covered, and whether a human resolved the issue. |
| Deadline accuracy | 10% | Delivery against the promised time across all test orders. |
| Refund policy | 8% | Outcome of a real claim, not the wording of the guarantee. |
| Revisions | 7% | Number included, length of window, and quality of the returned edit. |
| Subject expertise | 7% | Verifiable depth in the disciplines the provider advertises. |
| Ease of ordering | 5% | Steps to checkout, forced accounts, clarity of the quote. |
| Student satisfaction | 5% | Verified reviews only, weighted for recency and volume. |
| Security | 4% | Payment handling, data retention, account deletion, contact leakage. |
| Overall value | 4% | What the money buys once quality and risk are priced in. |
The scoring scale
- 9.0–10
- Passed every hard check; recommended without caveats.
- 8.0–8.9
- Reliable with a named trade-off we spell out in the review.
- 7.0–7.9
- Usable in specific cases only; at least one criterion is weak.
- Below 7.0
- Not recommended. We publish the reason rather than quietly delisting.
What cannot change a score
- Advertising spend or a commission agreement
- A provider's own testimonials or review widgets
- Requests to remove a con, or legal threats
- Traffic potential of a keyword
Providers may submit a factual correction with evidence. If they are right, we re-test and print the change — see the editorial policy.