Our rating methodology

We believe provider comparisons should be based on transparent, consistent and verifiable criteria.

Our scoring system evaluates every provider against the same framework. Each provider receives a score out of 100 based on publicly available information, verified provider data and independent customer feedback.

The methodology may be adapted slightly depending on the type of provider being evaluated. EOR, contractor of record, payroll, global employment and contractor management providers do not always offer the same services, so we only score criteria that are relevant to the specific category.

There’s no one-size-fits-all provider. Different companies care about different things, so we’re just showing you the pros, cons, and best use cases for each one.

Our 100-point scoring system

Each provider is evaluated across eight major criteria. The weights are shown in the table at the top of this page and focus on what matters most when choosing a payroll or HR provider.

We also adjust the emphasis for specific topics. For instance, a country guide focuses more on local infrastructure, and a contractor page prioritizes payments and compliance.

1. Country coverage and employment model — 20 points

We evaluate both the breadth and depth of a provider's coverage.

What we assess

• Number of countries supported
• Number of countries where the provider can legally employ workers
• Owned entities vs. third-party partners
• Direct employment model
• Partner-based employment model
• Regional coverage
• Ability to support multiple countries from one platform
• Availability of local payroll
• Availability of contractor services
• Ability to support different worker types

Where relevant, we distinguish between:

Owned entity: the provider employs workers through its own legal entity in the country.

Partner entity: the provider relies on a third-party local entity or partner.

This distinction is important because the number of countries advertised by a provider does not necessarily indicate the depth of its local infrastructure.

Scoring principle

A provider with broad coverage and substantial direct local infrastructure will generally score higher than a provider with similar geographic coverage that relies predominantly on third-party partners.

Country coverage is also evaluated at the country level where appropriate. A provider may therefore receive different assessments for different markets.

2. Pricing and cost transparency — 15 points

We evaluate how clearly the total cost can be understood before signing a contract.

What we assess

• Published monthly pricing
• Per-employee/per-contractor fees
• Minimum monthly fees
• Setup fees
• Implementation fees
• Deposits
• Offboarding or termination fees
• Additional payroll fees
• Payment processing fees
• Currency conversion / FX fees
• Benefits-related fees
• Immigration-related fees
• Additional service charges
• Discounts and volume pricing
• Contract minimums
• Availability of a free trial or demo, where relevant

A provider does not automatically receive a lower score simply because its price is higher. We evaluate price transparency and value separately from absolute price.

A provider with a higher price may still offer broader services or infrastructure. Conversely, a low headline price may not represent the actual cost if significant additional fees apply.

Where pricing is not publicly available, we record it as Quote Required.

3. Compliance and legal infrastructure — 15 points

International employment involves significant legal and regulatory requirements. We therefore evaluate the provider's compliance infrastructure and ability to manage local employment obligations.

What we assess

• Local employment compliance
• Payroll tax handling
• Social security administration
• Statutory benefits
• Employment contracts
• Local labor law support
• Regulatory registrations and licenses where applicable
• Data protection and security certifications
• KYC/AML processes where relevant
• Worker classification support
• Immigration and work permit support
• Compliance monitoring
• Local legal or HR expertise

We distinguish between information that is directly documented and general marketing claims.

Where a provider states that it owns a local entity, license or certification, we aim to verify the claim using an appropriate primary source where practical.

4. Services and capabilities — 15 points

This category measures what the provider can actually do for a business beyond the headline service.

EOR-related capabilities may include

• Employee onboarding
• Employment contracts
• Payroll
• Benefits administration
• Leave management
• Expense management
• Employee termination
• HR administration
• Immigration support
• Equipment management
• Employee support
• HR advisory

Contractor-related capabilities may include

• Contractor onboarding
• Contractor agreements
• Contractor classification
• Invoice management
• Contractor payments
• Tax documentation
• Conversion from contractor to employee
• Contractor compliance

Additional services may include

• Global payroll
• Recruitment
• Talent sourcing
• Background checks
• Relocation
• Immigration
• Entity establishment
• Entity management
• HR consulting

We score the capabilities that are relevant to the provider's category.

5. Payments and financial operations — 10 points

International employment and contractor services involve moving money across borders. We therefore assess how flexible and transparent the provider's payment infrastructure is.

What we assess

• Supported payment methods
• Supported currencies
• Number of payout currencies
• Bank transfers
• Local payment methods
• Card payments, where available
• Multi-currency support
• Contractor payouts
• Employee payroll payments
• Payment processing speed
• Payment schedules
• FX transparency
• International transfers
• Ability to withdraw or transfer funds
• Support for individuals and/or businesses

Where applicable, we distinguish between:

Funding methods — how the client pays the provider.

Payout methods — how the employee or contractor receives money.

These are recorded separately because a provider may support many funding methods but offer relatively few payout options.

6. Platform and technology — 10 points

We evaluate the technology that customers actually use.

What we assess

• User interface
• Employee/contractor self-service
• Client dashboard
• Onboarding workflow
• Payroll management
• Document management
• Reporting
• Expense management
• Time-off management
• Integrations
• HRIS integrations
• Accounting integrations
• API availability
• Automation
• Mobile application
• Security features
• Data export capabilities

Where API or integration availability is important, we distinguish between a documented public integration/API and custom integrations that require provider involvement.

7. Customer experience and reputation — 10 points

Customer feedback is an important source of information, but we do not treat review-platform scores as a direct measure of provider quality.

What we assess

• Third-party review ratings
• Number of reviews
• Review recency
• Customer support availability
• Support channels
• Account management
• Onboarding experience
• Commonly reported strengths
• Commonly reported problems
• Complaint patterns
• Response to customer issues

Where review data is available, we consider both the rating and the volume of reviews.

A 5.0 rating based on a small number of reviews should not automatically carry the same evidentiary weight as a similar rating supported by thousands of reviews.

How we handle customer reviews

We do not present isolated allegations as facts. We analyze publicly available customer feedback and summarize recurring themes.

For example:

"Users frequently mention responsive account management and straightforward onboarding."

or:

"Some users report delays in support responses during more complex cases."

Reviews describe individual experiences and do not necessarily establish that a particular issue occurs universally.

We also consider the source and relevance of reviews and avoid treating provider-controlled testimonials as equivalent to independent customer-review platforms.

8. Industry and use-case expertise — 5 points

Some providers have particularly strong experience in specific industries, worker types, company sizes or use cases.

A provider may therefore perform particularly well in a specific use-case comparison even if another provider has a higher overall score.

How individual criteria are scored

Each criterion is converted into a standardized score before being weighted.

Depending on the criterion, we use one of three approaches:

Quantitative scoring

Used when the underlying data can be measured objectively.

Examples:

• Number of countries
• Number of currencies
• Number of payment methods
• Number of integrations
• Number of reviews
• Published monthly price

Evidence-based scoring

Used when the criterion requires evaluating the depth or quality of a capability.

Examples:

• Entity ownership
• Compliance infrastructure
• Customer support
• Platform capabilities
• Industry expertise

Normalized scoring

Used when providers need to be compared against each other.

For example, country coverage may be converted into a normalized score so that providers can be compared consistently even as the market changes.

The exact formula for each quantitative metric is documented internally and remains consistent across providers.

Overall score interpretation

The overall score maps to the score bands shown in the table at the top of this page.

A provider with a lower overall score may still be a strong fit for a particular country, industry or use case. For this reason, we encourage readers to look at the individual criteria and not to rely only on the overall score.