AIFE
DirectoryNews
How We Score
About
AIFE

AI For Everyone

Built with AI

Explore

  • Directory
  • News
  • How We Score
  • About

Categories

  • Chatbots
  • Coding
  • Image
  • Video
  • Audio
  • Website Builders

Resources

  • APISoon
  • DocumentationSoon
  • ChangelogSoon

© 2026 AIFE. All rights reserved.

PrivacyTerms
How AIFE ranks AI tools

Two lenses. One honest number.

The AIFE Score is simple enough to repeat to a friend — and we publish the whole thing. No sponsored ranks, no hidden weights, no filled-in blanks.

Score=70%Popularity+30%Quality
The mix

Exactly what’s in the AIFE Score

Two lenses, each anchored to real data. The percentages are the actual weights in the formula — published from the engine code, not approximated.

70%

PopularityLive

Verifiable crowd behavior — every trusted ranking (market cap, players, votes) defaults to it.

Source: Monthly website visits (Similarweb + Tranco), domain-attribution corrected

Live — monthly visits, log-scaled against the whole board

30%

QualityLive

Separates the merely-big from the actually-good; lifts Claude above higher-traffic, lower-graded rivals.

Source: Graded review across 5 dimensions (features, performance, ease of use, use cases, support)

Live for graded tools; grading pipeline expanding to the top 300

Worked example

The math, on a real tool

These are Claude’s live numbers as of 2026-07-15 — check them against the table yourself.

Claude

Popularity (from 220M visits/month)72.8/100
Quality (graded review)86/100
0.70 × 72.8 + 0.30 × 86 = 76.8 → displayed 77

Clauderanks above tools with more traffic (Grok, DeepSeek) because its quality grade lifts it — that’s the 30% doing its job.

The gate

Both lenses, or no score at all

A tool missing either lens shows “Not scored yet”— never an imputed or renormalized number. We’d rather show fewer scores than fake one.

Scored

Real traffic data and a real quality grade exist. The formula above runs exactly as published — nothing else touches the number.

Not scored yet

Either lens is missing. No blank is filled with a guess, an average, or a re-shared weight. The tool still ranks normally by popularity and price in the table while we close the gap.

What counts as a real quality grade

Quality is graded across 5 dimensions. A tool needs at least 3 of the 5 to count — an isolated single grade is noise, not signal.

FeaturesPerformanceEase of useUse casesSupport
Data sources

Where every number comes from

Popularity — monthly website visits

Monthly visits from Similarweb and Tranco, log-scaled against the whole board. We correct domain attribution by hand: a sub-product does notinherit its parent domain’s traffic (a tool hosted on a giant’s domain doesn’t get the giant’s numbers). Where a value is an estimate rather than a measurement, it’s marked with ~ in the table.

Quality — AI-assisted grading

An AI-assisted grading of the tool’s own product information across the 5 dimensions above (methodology id ai-assisted-v1). Said plainly: this is not member reviews yet. Real user reviews replace this lens as they accumulate — see the roadmap below.

Price — never part of the Score

When we fitted the formula against real-world rankings, price carried roughly zero weight — so it isn’t in the Score. It has its own column in the table; folding it into the number as well would double-count it.

Honest limits

What the score does not yet know

  • App-native tools under-rank. Tools that live in an IDE, CLI, or Discord — Cursor, Claude Code, Midjourney — generate little website traffic, so any web-visits spine undersells them. That stays true until we add a second usage signal (VS Code installs, GitHub stars).
  • No real user-satisfaction data yet. The quality lens grades the tool’s product information; it doesn’t know how members actually feel. We won’t manufacture satisfaction from marketing copy.
  • 7-day movement isn’t live yet. Real trend data is accruing from daily snapshots and ships only when it’s real. The legacy trend columns sitting in our database are seed data the site never reads.
Roadmap

Lenses we’ll add — when the data is real

A “Coming” lens affects nothing until its pipeline ships. And a standing rule: votes and saves will never move a rank.

Coming

Momentum (7d)

Coming — real 7-day traffic movement from daily Tranco snapshots (pipeline accruing)

Coming

Community

Coming — member reviews & saves once a real base exists; votes never move a rank

Editorial independence

No sponsored ranks. Ever.

Same formula, applied uniformly, to every tool. We don’t sell placements, and no payment of any kind can move a tool up the page. The weights on this page are the weights in the code — if they change, the changelog below says so, dated.

Changelog

AIFE Score v3 · 2026-07-15 — Reverse-engineered two-lens rebuild: 70% Popularity + 30% Quality, strict gate replaces renormalization, price removed from the score, domain-attribution pins written to visits data.

AIFE Score v2 · 2026-07-15 — Rebuilt for honesty after auditing how Artificial Analysis, LMArena, G2 and a16z score: no blank is filled with a neutral guess, the score is anchored in real adoption, and every tool ships a confidence badge. We publish the mix and the math — the only AI-tools directory that shows you both.

See the Rankings