Methodology
Our Comparison Methodology
Comparing eSIM providers is only useful when the comparison is structured, repeatable, and free from bias. This page explains exactly how we collect data, apply our scoring rubric, and keep evaluations neutral across all 4 providers we track.
Data collection process
We collect plan data directly from each provider's public website and app. For every provider-destination pair, we record available plan sizes, durations, prices, network partners, and whether the plan includes voice or SMS. We cover 209 destinations and re-collect all pricing data weekly. Feature data (app quality, activation method, support channels) is audited monthly through hands-on re-checks of each provider's current product.
Feature scoring rubric
Every provider is evaluated on eight discrete features. Each receives a score from 1 to 5 based on documented criteria:
Country coverage
Number of supported destinations and whether the provider covers the full country or only urban areas
Price competitiveness
Per-GB cost normalized across plan sizes, compared to the median price for that destination
Plan flexibility
Range of data sizes and durations available, including whether custom bundles or top-ups exist
Network quality
Which local carrier the eSIM routes through and that carrier's ranking in OpenSignal reports
Activation speed
Time from purchase to working data connection, measured on iPhone and Android
App usability
Setup flow clarity, data usage tracking accuracy, and ease of managing multiple eSIMs
Support responsiveness
Channel availability (live chat, email, phone) and measured first-response time to test tickets
Refund and cancellation terms
Whether unused plans can be refunded and how transparent the policy is before purchase
How matchup pages work
Our head-to-head comparison pages (for example, Airalo vs Holafly) place two providers side by side across every rubric feature. We show the raw score for each feature, highlight where one provider leads, and summarize the trade-offs in plain language. We do not declare an overall leader when the margin is within half a point, because at that range personal preferences (price vs coverage, app quality vs support) matter more than aggregate scores.
Neutral evaluation standards
No provider can pay for a higher score or preferred placement in our comparison tables. We purchase all plans with our own funds and do not accept free review units. Affiliate commissions fund the research, but commission rates have no bearing on scores. When we update a score, we publish the date and reason for the change.
Update schedule
Pricing data: refreshed weekly. Feature audits: monthly. Provider reviews and matchup pages: updated within 72 hours of any material change (new plan tiers, coverage expansion, app redesign, or policy update). Country-level comparison data is audited quarterly.
For background on our team and editorial principles, see our about page.
Score rubric
Score definitions by dimension
Each provider receives a 1-5 score per dimension. The table below defines what each score means in concrete terms.
| Score | Coverage | Speed | App | Pricing | Support |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 5 | 200+ countries | 100+ Mbps avg | 4.8+ store rating | <$3/GB | <2hr response + chat |
| 4 | 150-199 countries | 50-99 Mbps avg | 4.5-4.7 rating | $3-4/GB | <6hr + chat |
| 3 | 100-149 countries | 20-49 Mbps avg | 4.0-4.4 rating | $4-5/GB | <12hr email |
| 2 | 50-99 countries | 10-19 Mbps avg | 3.5-3.9 rating | $5-7/GB | <24hr email |
| 1 | <50 countries | <10 Mbps avg | <3.5 rating | >$7/GB | >24hr email only |
Worked example
How scores produce a ranking: Japan
Weighted calculation using each provider's dimension scores. Weights: Coverage 0.25, Speed 0.20, App 0.15, Pricing 0.25, Support 0.15.
| Provider | Coverage (0.25) | Speed (0.20) | App (0.15) | Pricing (0.25) | Support (0.15) | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Airalo | 5.0 | 4.7 | 4.9 | 4.3 | 4.5 | 4.67 |
| Holafly | 4.5 | 4.6 | 4.4 | 4.8 | 4.6 | 4.60 |
| Nomad | 3.8 | 4.3 | 3.9 | 4.9 | 3.5 | 4.15 |
| Saily | 4.2 | 4.5 | 4.6 | 4.2 | 3.8 | 4.26 |
The weighted total determines ranking order. For Japan, every provider uses a Tier-1 local carrier (SoftBank, NTT Docomo, KDDI au), so speed scores cluster tightly. The ranking spread comes from coverage breadth, pricing structure, and app quality.
The same formula applies to every country page. When two providers score within 0.10 points, we note the margin as negligible and list both as strong options rather than declaring a single leader.