datingappradar

Test reports and guides

The comparison matrix shows scores. These reports show how they come about: which feature we checked and how, where an app behaves differently in daily use than on paper, and which number we could not explain.

Every test follows the same order: sign-up, a first week of use, a check of prices and payment model, a run through the safety and verification features, a look at the privacy statements. Anything we could not verify ourselves stays in the text as an open question. For embla, which has not launched yet, sign-up and use are not possible; there we rate the concept and pricing model and say so in the test.

Then there are the guides: cost comparisons across all apps, an overview of verification methods, and the question of which app fits which intent. Where numbers are missing we say so instead of estimating them. The one exception is embla: because the app has not launched yet, its scores are estimates based on the concept and pricing model, and each one carries the ‘Preview’ label.

Four friends at an outdoor café table on an autumn afternoon, talking animatedly

7 min read

The best dating apps of 2026, tested

Six dating apps tested for 2026: what the overall ranking shows, what it leaves out and which app fits your goal. With every score and its limits.

Every report states the date of its last check. If a provider changes prices, allowances or verification rules, the affected test is updated in the next round and the score in the matrix is corrected with it.

Where we could not check something, it stays in the text as an open question instead of appearing in the table as an estimate. That makes individual reports less complete and the comparison as a whole more reliable.

One exception is an announced app such as embla: its scores rest on the published concept and pricing model, are marked as provisional, and will be re-checked in daily use after launch.

See the comparison