MobileRank Rating Methodology

Every metric is linearly mapped to a 0-100 scale relative to market anchors:

score = clamp((value − min) × 100 / (max − min), 0, 100)

For "lower is better" metrics (weight, price, process node), the normalization is inverted. Anchors are pinned to the best device in the current catalog (an approach similar to NanoReview): the top model of 2026 scores ≈95-100, and everything else scales down from there. When a new generation of chips arrives, the anchors move up — so scores are comparable within a single catalog snapshot, not across years.

The arithmetic uses integer (floor) division — the rating is deterministic and reproducible.

total = (perf×38 + display×12 + camera×25 + battery×15 + design×4 + value×6) / 100

Category	Weight	What It's Based On	Scale Anchors
Performance	38%	AnTuTu v11 (weight 15/30), Geekbench 6 single (8/30) and multi (7/30)	AnTuTu 700K → 4 300 000; GB6 single 1000 → 3800; multi 2800 → 11 500
Camera	25%	Uses the DXOMark score when available. Otherwise falls back to a resolution-based heuristic: main (6/15), telephoto (4/15), ultrawide (3/15), front (2/15)	DXOMark: 45 → 175 (the actual range of tested devices). Main module: a piecewise scale — 12-64 MP delivers 85% of the score, 64-200 MP adds a diminishing 15% (MP ≠ quality)
Battery & Charging	15%	Capacity (12/20), wired charging (5/20), wireless (3/20)	Capacity: piecewise — 3500-5200 mAh gives 70% of the score, 5200-9000 mAh adds the remaining 30% (otherwise hundreds of models ≥5200 mAh would hit the ceiling). Charging 20 → 120W; wireless 0 → 80W
Display	12%	Refresh rate	60 → 120 Hz
Value for Money	6%	Inverse price normalization	$1600 → $150 (cheaper = better)
Design	4%	Inverse weight normalization	240 → 160g (lighter = better)

Missing benchmarks and camera/charging specs are replaced with the scale's lower anchor (a score of 0 on that metric) — models with incomplete data are more likely underrated, not overrated. Exceptions: an unknown weight is treated as a typical 200g, and an unknown price as $800 (the midpoint of the scale, so it doesn't skew the total given these categories' small weights). Unreleased models (announcements and rumors) never appear in the top rankings.

Lab measurements don't exist for all 2410 models, so the hours of battery life shown are a transparent calculated estimate:

current (mA) = 260 + 38 × diagonal(inches), then adjustments: ×1.02 at 90Hz, ×1.05 at 120Hz, ×1.08 at 144Hz+; ×0.92 for SoCs ≤4nm, ×1.10 for ≥7nm. hours = capacity / current.

The model is calibrated against real NanoReview battery test measurements (43 models in the database): the median deviation from their web-browsing test is ≈16%. This is an estimate for comparing models against each other, not a promise of specific hours. Where a real measurement exists, we show that measurement on the page.

A detailed accuracy breakdown is in our research articles.

Value for Money (Top "Best Deals")

Sorted by total / √price among models with a rating ≥55 and a price ≥$80. The square root dampens the bias toward ultra-cheap models: without it, a "rating 20 at $80" would formally outrank a "rating 90 at $500."

Brand Rating

The average score of a brand's top 5 models from the last 2 catalog years, with Bayesian smoothing (the same weighted-rating scheme IMDb uses):

WR = (n×R + m×C) / (n + m), where n is the number of models in the brand's top, R is their average score, m = 3 is the prior's weight, and C = min(R, 50) is an asymmetric prior.

Smoothing keeps a brand with a single lucky model from outranking brands with a full, consistent lineup, and the prior's asymmetry (min) never drags a weak brand upward "for free."

Processors (SoC)

total = antutu×30% + single×25% + multi×25% + efficiency×20%

Anchors: AnTuTu 700K → 4M; GB6 single 1050 → 3800; multi 2850 → 11,500. Efficiency is the inverse normalization of process node: 3nm = 100, 7nm = 0.

GPU

total = 3DMark Wild Life Extreme×55% + GFXBench Aztec High×45% (anchors 1400-7500 and 18-120 FPS). If only one benchmark is available, that one is used without diluting the score with a zero; if neither is available, we show an honest "no data" instead of a zero.

Source	What We Use	Database Coverage
AnTuTu (official lists)	v11 scores, including per-device results	558 devices + SoC backfill
Geekbench 6	Single-core / multi-core	via SoC and device catalogs
NanoReview	Real battery tests (web/video/gaming/overall), prices, specs	43 battery-life measurements
DXOMark	Lab camera scores (with attribution and a link to the test on the card)	165 models
GSMArena, phonesdata, manufacturer sites	Specs: display, battery, cameras, dimensions, NFC, IP rating	2410 smartphones, 209 SoCs, 47 GPUs

Data is cross-checked between sources; price conflicts are resolved in favor of the manually verified figure.

• Battery-life hours are calculated, not measured (except for 43 models with a NanoReview test). The average deviation from a real test is ~16%.
• Cameras without a DXOMark score are rated by megapixel count — a weak quality signal. 165 out of 2410 models have a DXOMark score; for the rest, the camera score is a heuristic.
• Benchmarks are averaged: a specific unit may post different numbers depending on software version, cooling, and RAM.
• Prices are a snapshot at import time and go stale quickly, especially right after launch.
• Models with incomplete data get a conservative (lower) score — missing data is never rewarded.
• Scale anchors are revised whenever a new chip generation arrives — comparing scores only makes sense within a single catalog version.

We publish the rating's derived data (every category's score and the estimated battery life for 2410 models) as an open dataset under the CC BY 4.0 license:

• mobilerank_ratings.csv — MobileRank ratings for every model in the catalog
• sample_raw_specs.csv — a sample of raw specs (top 100 models)
• README.md — column dictionary, data provenance, and usage terms

• 85-100 Flagship
• 70-84 Sub-flagship
• 50-69 Solid mid-ranger
• 30-49 Budget
• 0-29 Ultra-budget