How we rate SMS providers
Every score on this site is the unweighted average of six criteria, out of ten, applied identically to all 45 providers. Everything is compiled from published material on a stated date. We do not open accounts and we do not send test traffic.
The six criteria and their weights
Each criterion is scored out of ten and carries the same weight as the other five, so the overall score is their average. The six weights are 16.67% each, which is one sixth apiece and sums to 100% before rounding. Equal weight is a deliberate choice and it is the method's biggest weakness: it judges a two person clinic sending appointment reminders and a bank pushing a million passcodes identically.
Value for money
Published cents per SMS at the volumes a provider states, plus number, setup and monthly fees, and what inbound costs.
16.67% of the overall score
Features
Send methods (dashboard, email to SMS, API, SMPP), two way messaging, scheduling, templates, reporting and named integrations.
16.67% of the overall score
Reliability
Published uptime or SLA, the carrier routes the provider states, and status page history.
16.67% of the overall score
Reputation
Public review score and count, operating history, and how transparently pricing is published.
16.67% of the overall score
Compliance
10DLC registration support, toll free verification, short code availability, and HIPAA or ISO claims with evidence.
16.67% of the overall score
Customer service
Channels, hours, US phone availability and documentation depth.
16.67% of the overall score
The weights are fixed across all providers and change only at a dated method revision recorded in the change log below. The build checks the arithmetic: if a published overall score stops matching the equal weighted average of its six criterion scores, the site does not build.
What a score means
Ten is best in class for US business messaging. Seven to nine is strong with specific trade offs. Five to six is average: usable, but bettered by rivals on most criteria. Below five signals a real weakness a buyer should weigh. Scores are spread across that range deliberately, so the ratings discriminate between providers rather than clustering.
The gateway fit score for SMS APIs
The SMS API rankings use a second score, the gateway fit score, alongside the overall score. It measures how well a provider's own developer documentation equips a developer to send US SMS through it, on eight criteria of equal weight, 12.5% each. It is scored for the 15 providers our evidence classes as gateways, the ones a developer buys SMS from by API, and read from each provider's own docs on 21 September 2026.
Documented REST API for sending SMS
A documented REST endpoint for sending one SMS, with its request fields.
12.5% of the gateway fit score
Official SDKs
Official client libraries the provider publishes, by language.
12.5% of the gateway fit score
Delivery receipts by webhook
Delivery receipts pushed to your server by webhook.
12.5% of the gateway fit score
Sandbox, test mode or test credentials
A sandbox, test mode or test credentials for sending without live charges.
12.5% of the gateway fit score
Published US throughput or rate limit
A published US sending rate, in messages per second, per number type where stated.
12.5% of the gateway fit score
Published uptime SLA
A published uptime percentage the provider commits to.
12.5% of the gateway fit score
Public status page
A public status page reporting incidents.
12.5% of the gateway fit score
US 10DLC, toll-free and short code numbers
US 10DLC long codes, toll-free numbers and short codes, all three.
12.5% of the gateway fit score
Each criterion scores 1 where the provider's docs state it, 0.5 where they state it with a qualification (a throughput figure for SMPP only, a free trial instead of a sandbox, libraries claimed without a count), and 0 where the docs were read for it and do not state it. The gateway fit score is the average times ten, to two decimals, and the build checks that arithmetic the same way it checks the overall score. A criterion we have not read yet is never scored as zero: the provider is shown as not assessed until it is read, and a provider with no public developer documentation is not assessed rather than scored low. 12 of the 15 are scored today; BurstSMS, Notifyre, Vonage are not assessed yet.
How a new provider is scored
Scored by these checks from 28 September 2026.
This section publishes the checks behind the six scores for providers added from the date shown. Each check is answered yes or no, or with a number, on the provider's own published pages, with the URL, date read and quoted words recorded. A fact the pages do not state scores nothing. Providers scored before that date carry scores the editors set against the same six criteria, apart from Vonage and Sinch Engage, re-scored by these checks on October 14, 2026.
| Check | What scores | Points |
|---|---|---|
| Entry US rate per SMS | The published US rate at the provider's lowest published entry threshold (the smallest spend, volume or plan it applies at; the long code rate where rows are number types), in US cents, excluding carrier fees.0.50c or less: 5; 0.51c to 0.80c: 4; 0.81c to 1.20c: 3; 1.21c to 2.00c: 2; 2.01c to 4.00c: 1; above 4.00c: 0.5; No US dollar rate published: 0. | 0 to 5 |
| Long code rental | A long code number published at $1.50 a month or less, or included. | 1 |
| Toll-free rental | A toll-free number published at $3.00 a month or less, or included. | 1 |
| No setup fee | No setup or onboarding fee, stated as such. | 1 |
| No monthly minimum | Pay as you go available, with no mandatory monthly platform minimum. | 1 |
| Inbound cost published | Inbound SMS published as free, or published at a rate. | 1 |
| Check | What scores | Points |
|---|---|---|
| Web app | A web dashboard or web app for sending. | 1 |
| API | An HTTP or REST API. | 1 |
| Email to SMS | Email to SMS sending. | 1 |
| SMPP | An SMPP connection. | 1 |
| Two-way | Two-way messaging: inbound replies received. | 1 |
| Scheduling | Scheduled sending. | 1 |
| Templates | Message templates. | 1 |
| Reporting | Reporting or analytics on sent messages. | 1 |
| Named integrations | One point for naming any integration by name, a second for naming ten or more. A live counter shows integrations exist but its number is not scored. | 0 to 2 |
| Check | What scores | Points |
|---|---|---|
| Published uptime | Contractual means the figure is in a service level agreement, terms of service or another document that creates an obligation. Marketing means a headline, footer or feature list. A figure that applies only on a paid tier scores one band lower.Contractual 99.99% or better: 6; 99.95% or better: 5; 99.9% or better: 4; 99.5% or better: 3; below 99.5%: 2; marketing claim only: 1.5; none: 0. | 0 to 6 |
| Carrier routes | Two points for naming US carriers as routes or a direct route claim specific to the US; one for a direct carrier network claimed globally or without naming a carrier. A carrier named in a fee table is a price list, not a route, and a published aggregator route defeats a direct claim. | 0 to 2 |
| Status page | Two points for a public status page with dated incident history or a rolling uptime window; one for a status page with neither. | 0 to 2 |
| Check | What scores | Points |
|---|---|---|
| Trustpilot score and count | Banded on the Trustpilot score. Fewer than 50 reviews cannot score above 3 or below 2; fewer than 10 reviews, no reviews or no profile scores 2.5, the midpoint.4.0 or above: 5; 3.5 or above: 4; 3.0 or above: 3; 2.5 or above: 2; 2.0 or above: 1; below 2.0: 0. | 0 to 5 |
| Operating history | Years since the founding year the provider publishes: 20 or more 2.5, 10 to 19 2, 5 to 9 1.5, under 5 1. An unpublished founding year scores 1. | 0 to 2.5 |
| Pricing transparency | A published US per message rate 2.5; published plan, bundle or top-up prices with no per message rate 1.5; no published price 0. | 0 to 2.5 |
| Check | What scores | Points |
|---|---|---|
| 10DLC registration | Brand and campaign registration support published. | 3 |
| Toll-free verification | Two points where toll-free numbers are offered and the verification process is published; one where toll-free is offered with no verification detail. | 0 to 2 |
| Short codes | Short codes available and published. | 2 |
| HIPAA | 1.5 where the provider states HIPAA compliance with a business associate agreement; 0.75 for HIPAA ready, capable or supported wording. | 0 to 1.5 |
| SOC 2 or ISO 27001 | 1.5 for a stated SOC 2 Type II or ISO 27001 certification; 0.75 for a security claim naming no certification. ISO 9001 is not a security certification. | 0 to 1.5 |
| Check | What scores | Points |
|---|---|---|
| Phone line | A published phone line. | 1 |
| Live chat | Live chat. | 1 |
| Email or ticket | Email or a ticketing system. | 1 |
| Support hours | 24/7 3; beyond a standard business day or including weekends 2; business hours 1.5; unpublished 0. | 0 to 3 |
| US phone | Two points for a published US number that reaches support; one for a US number for sales or general enquiries only. | 0 to 2 |
| Documentation | Two points for public developer documentation with an API reference; one for a help centre or knowledge base only. | 0 to 2 |
| Paid support gate | Minus one where support is available only on a paid support plan. The criterion's floor is 0. | minus 1 |
Each criterion rounds to the nearest 0.5, an exact half rounding up. The overall is the mean of the six rounded criterion scores, to two decimals. The site's build refuses to publish a score for a provider marked as scored by these checks if the checks, run on that provider's recorded evidence, give a different number.
Where the evidence comes from
The provider's own published pages
Never a press release, a sales quote or an aggregator. Prices, features and company facts are read from the provider's own site, from the United States, on a recorded date. Rates were first captured on 2026-09-08; each provider added since carries the date of its own read, printed on its review.
The basis is recorded, not flattened
Flat, by monthly volume, by top up amount, by plan, by credit bundle, by number type. 33 of the 45 publish a rate we can compare in US cents, and each keeps its own basis rather than being converted into a number that looks comparable and is not. One provider prices in euros and is never converted.
Review scores carry their sample size
Public review scores come from that provider's Trustpilot profile with the score, the review count and the capture date stated together, because a score without its sample size is not a figure.
Nothing here is described as tested
We do not open accounts and we do not send test traffic. Where a provider does not publish something, the page says it is not published rather than estimating it.
Who does what
Alain is the Director of SMS Comparison and has spent his career in the communications sector. He holds the Order of Australia Medal, is a Justice of the Peace and is a Fellow of Communication and Public Relations Australia (formerly the Public Relations Institute of Australia), and IPRA documents his RMIT teaching background.
Justin founded SMS Comparison in 2014 and is Chief Executive Officer, running the Australian, US and UK editions. He owns the six criteria behind every score on this site and signs each one off before it publishes.
Max has led search strategy at SMS Comparison since 2024 and maintains the provider data, pricing tables and comparison tables, sourcing every figure directly from each provider's own published rates. Based in Melbourne, he is completing a Business degree at RMIT University.
How we make money, and what it does not touch
SMS Comparison earns an affiliate commission when a reader signs up with a provider through a link on this site. No provider pays for a position, a score, an award label or an inclusion. That relationship is disclosed on every page that carries such a link, and it does not change a score or a position. Scores come from the six criteria above and nothing else. Where a provider scores poorly, the review says so.
If we ever cannot say that honestly, this paragraph is the first thing that should change.
Method changelog
Gateway fit score published
The SMS API rankings now use a gateway fit score: eight criteria of equal weight read from each gateway's own developer documentation, with providers not yet read shown as not assessed.
Scores derived from a dated capture
Every criterion score is now computed from a recorded capture of the provider's own published pages rather than carried forward, and the build fails if a published overall stops matching the mean of its six.
Weights published as an explicit percentage
The equal weighting itself is unchanged and has applied since 2019. What is new is that the figure is on the page and verified by the build rather than only described.
Unpublished rates marked rather than estimated
Providers publishing no per message rate now show as unpublished instead of carrying an inferred figure, and they are scored on the other five criteria.
Six criteria set
The US edition launched on the same six criteria still in use.