Methodology
Methodology v0.1. Every provider is scored with the same rubric and the same evidence rules, without exception.
Dimensions & weights (total 100)
| Dimension | Weight | Basis |
|---|---|---|
| Merchant acceptance | 20% | Phase 1: checked against each merchant’s official acceptance rules (network, issuing country, card type, 3DS); labelled “not paid-tested”. |
| Total cost (12 months) | 20% | Same scenario for every card: issuance, top-up, transaction, FX and monthly fees; unpublished fees are never treated as zero. |
| Fund safety & compliance | 20% | Whether issuer and licences are disclosed, balance refundability and fund custody. |
| KYC & eligible regions | 15% | ID requirements, restricted regions, availability in mainland China and emerging markets. |
| Stability & shutdown history | 10% | History of shutdowns, paused sign-ups and blocked BINs (officially confirmed events only). |
| Refunds & support | 10% | Official refund paths and timelines, support channels; pre-sales inquiries without money involved. |
| User experience | 5% | Sign-up and KYC walkthrough (no funding), app quality, official mobile wallet support. |
If any dimension lacks evidence, the score is shown as incomplete. We never guess or fill in.
Evidence levels
- A1 · Paid testPaid test (real card, top-up, purchase). Not done in phase 1; to be decided for phase 2.
- A2 · Verified (no-cost)No-cost verification: line-by-line fee checks, terms review, sign-up/KYC walkthrough (no funding), support inquiries — with dates and redacted screenshots.
- B · Official sourceOfficial public sources: fee pages, terms, help centres, merchant payment pages — with links, fetch dates and archives.
- C · UnverifiedThird-party or community reports: leads only, never scored.
Phase-1 no-cost verification process
- Check official public fees line by line and archive the source pages.
- Review terms and documents: issuer, licences, balance refunds, restricted regions.
- Sign-up and KYC walkthrough up to the step before funding — no top-up, no payment method, never someone else’s ID.
- Merchant acceptance research against the official payment pages of a fixed merchant list.
- Compile evidence and score: redacted screenshots stored, team review before publishing.
Source rules
- Official sources first: provider sites, terms, help centres and original notices; merchant rules (e.g. OpenAI, Anthropic) are cited only from their official help centres.
- Every fact records its source link and access date, plus the page’s own date when it has one.
- If only media or community reposts are available, the item is level C and marked “not officially confirmed”; level C is a lead only and never scored.
- When sources conflict, we show both and say so rather than picking one.
- Anything not officially published is marked “Not published”; when only the month is known, we say the exact date is not published.
- Outbound links are always plain; we never link pages carrying invite codes or referral parameters.
Ranking rules
- Only providers scored on all 7 dimensions with level A2 or B evidence get a total score and a rank.
- Without enough evidence, rankings and alternatives pages show facts and “scoring pending” — no ranking, no recommendation.
- Closed or suspended providers are excluded from rankings and only tracked on the status and alternatives pages.
What counts as a status event
We only record publicly documented events, with date, evidence level and whether they are officially confirmed. A provider’s status (active, suspended, closed…) only changes on official sources; community rumours never change it.
Content scope
We only review virtual cards: the cards’ fees, compliance and stability, plus merchants’ officially published payment rules. We never promise payment success rates.
Re-verification
Every page shows its last-verified date; anything older than 90 days is flagged for review. Every change to scores, fees or status is logged.
Changes to the methodology itself bump the version number and are explained in the corrections and change log.