Matching methodology
We publish the formula in full so the result can be checked. If a match percentage cannot be explained, it is not matching, it is a showcase with a pretty number
What exactly is scored
Matching works as a sum of points. Every provider starts from a base value, then points are added or subtracted across six signals. The result is clamped to a range from 6 to 99: we never give zero or one hundred on principle, because a perfect fit on every parameter does not exist.
| Signal | Points | When it applies |
|---|---|---|
| Base score | 42 | Every provider starts here |
| Workload match | +25 / −12 | The provider lists the scenario or not. No workload chosen: +6 |
| Location | +22 / −26 | Has a location in the region you need. Location not important: +6 |
| Requirements | +20 / −24 | Proportional to the share of requirements met. Nothing selected: +6 |
| Resources covered | +8 / −10 | A plan at or above the requested cores and memory exists |
| Within budget | +10 / −10 | The matching plan’s price fits the limit |
| Price per resource | +6 … −6 | Price per GB of memory relative to the base median |
| Total | 6 … 99 | Clamped to a range; zero and one hundred are never given |
About the “price per resource” axis
The last term compares the chosen plan’s price per gigabyte of memory with the median across the whole base. A plan half the median gets the maximum, twice the median gets the minimum, at the median it is zero. This is the only axis that works even when the visitor has chosen nothing yet: without it, all suitable providers would get the same score.
The metric is objective and computed from the same data shown in the catalog: you can recompute it by hand from the “per GB” column. It does not account for differences in platform quality, so its weight is deliberately small, just six points either way.
What the formula does not contain
The size of the affiliate commission is not a term in the calculation. A provider that pays us more gets not a single extra point. This is not a statement of intent but a property of the code: the file with the formula has no access to commission data.
For the same reason the catalog includes providers we have no affiliate relationship with. They take part in the matching on equal terms, and we earn nothing from them.
How a plan is chosen within a provider
The score is computed not for a provider in general but for the specific plan that best answers the request. The selection order is:
- First, plans in the required location are selected, if one is set
- Of those, the ones that cover the requested cores and memory remain
- If a disk requirement is checked, plans with NVMe get priority
- Among those within budget, the cheapest is chosen: you asked for a specific configuration, not the most power for your money
- If nothing fits the budget, the closest by price is shown
The last point matters: we do not hide a provider that did not fit the limit, we show it with an honest note of how much more expensive it is.
The price-freshness rule
Every plan has a verification date, shown on the showcase. A plan not checked for more than 7 days is hidden automatically rather than shown with an old price. The provider stays in the catalog, it just has no price until the next check.
That decision costs us part of the showcase. We consider the trade-off right: a catalog with forty confirmed prices is more useful than a catalog with four hundred prices of unknown freshness.
What the requirements mean
Requirements in the calculator are checked in different ways, worth knowing to read the result correctly:
- NVMe disk: Fast storage. The difference shows on databases, 1C and busy sites Checked per specific plan, not per provider
- Hourly billing: Spin a server up for a day and shut it down, pay by the hour Checked against the provider’s features
- Trial period: The provider lets you try a server before paying Checked against the provider’s features
- DDoS protection: Basic filtering on the provider side Checked against the provider’s features
- Backups: Built-in backups and snapshots in the panel Checked against the provider’s features
- Control panel: A web panel instead of a bare console Checked against the provider’s features
How the catalog is formed
A provider makes the catalog if it has a public price list we can verify and a line of virtual servers. We do not charge for inclusion or for a spot in the list. There is no paid placement on the site: if it ever appears, it will be a separate, clearly marked block and will not mix with the matching results.
We do not copy plan descriptions from providers’ sites. Specs come from the price list, but the wording is our own: copied merchant descriptions are treated by search engines as a thin affiliate scheme.
Why we do not write “best”
A superlative without a published comparison criterion is both an advertising-law issue and simply dishonest. We say “fits the workload” and show by which signals, not “best host of the year”.
What we will add
Near-term changes to the methodology: a separate renewal-price field next to the promo price, factoring the cost of an IPv4 address and a control panel into the total cost of ownership, and from the second month our own performance measurements on entry-level plans from several providers. Every change to the formula will be reflected on this page.