Where we stand, without hedging
We have no hands-on testing we can publish yet. Everything on this page comes from the developers' official documentation and from app store listings, not from trials we ran ourselves.
Until we publish measurements we gathered first-hand you will find no scores, no ratings and no start-up times here: we would rather show a table with a few empty cells than one full of numbers nobody can check. The protocol we will follow is public.
We chose to publish the site before having first-hand testing, because information about compatibility, formats and the legal framework is useful straight away and can be checked against public sources. What we avoided is everything that requires a hands-on check: no scores, no stars, no measured times, no numeric prices.
The empty cells in the tables are not an oversight. They mark a feature that is not documented in a verifiable way on official sources, and we would rather show the gap than fill it in for the sake of completeness.
Where today's data comes from
In order of priority:
- The developer's official documentation: the product site, release notes, the manual.
- The store listing the app is distributed from: supported platforms, requirements, permissions requested, pricing model.
- The manufacturer's technical documentation for devices: hardware specifications, supported codecs, operating system.
- Primary legal sources for the legal side: statutes, decisions of the authorities.
Where a source is ambiguous or contradictory, the field stays empty. We do not infer features by analogy with other apps, nor from user reviews in the stores.
The four levels of evidence
Apps and services are not all known in the same way. Every claim we publish therefore states the evidence behind it, and in the service comparison on the home page that label is visible next to each provider.
- Direct testing. Our team used the service in person, on listed devices and with a recorded date. It is the only level that earns the “Directly tested” label, and it cannot be written by hand: it requires a test record filed in the repository. Without a date, “tested” is not a claim you can check.
- Beta user feedback. Reports from people given access to a service in order to evaluate it. Useful information, but these are not independent reviews — someone given free access is not a third-party reviewer — and we will never call them that. We publish no names and no quotations without explicit consent.
- Official source. Read on the provider's or the rights holder's own site: catalogue, type of access, supported devices, price list. This is the level most of this site currently rests on.
- Stated by the provider. Figures and promises a provider publishes that nobody can check from outside: channel counts, catalogue sizes, promised quality. We report these only with explicit attribution, never as though we had measured them.
To these we add external sources — press and third parties — which we use as supporting research but which are not enough on their own to carry a commercial claim.
One level does not stand in for another. A service we have used ourselves remains a service whose quality and stability we know well, and nothing more: using it tells us nothing about the second-year renewal price, or how many devices it really allows at once.
How it works and who holds the rights are two different questions
There is one distinction we keep rigidly separate, in the data before the prose, because it is the one where the reader carries the most risk.
How a service performs — whether the stream starts, whether it holds up in the evening, whether the app is pleasant — is established by using it. Whether a service has the right to transmit the content it offers cannot be established by using it at all: on screen, an unauthorised stream is indistinguishable from an authorised one. If anything, the former often works beautifully, and that is precisely what makes it persuasive.
So the level of testing and the rights status are two separate fields in our data, and neither can move the other. A service whose authorisation has not been established does not appear among those we recommend, receives no purchase button and does not take first position, however well it performed in a trial. This is not a style rule: it is a condition the site generator checks on every publish, and which halts publication if broken.
The reason is straightforward. In Italy, law 93/2023 also sanctions people who knowingly subscribe to a service that redistributes channels without holding the rights. Recommending a subscription whose legal position is unclear exposes not only us but the people reading us. The legal framework is set out in the guide to IPTV and the law.
The criteria we will apply to hands-on testing
They are already defined, so that the method can be checked before the results even exist.
Installation and setup
Ease of installation
How many steps it takes to go from the store to a working app, and whether a computer or an extra account is needed.
Loading the source
How easy it is to enter an M3U playlist or Xtream Codes credentials, and whether the app accepts more than one profile.
Performance
Start-up time
Seconds from opening the app to a ready channel list, measured cold on a freshly restarted device.
Channel change speed
Average time between the key press and the first frame, over at least ten consecutive changes.
Stability
Interruptions, unexpected shutdowns and stream reloads across a reference session of continuous use.
Memory and heat impact
Behaviour on limited hardware, where most real-world problems show up.
Timing measurements will be taken on a freshly restarted device, over a wired network, with a reference playlist of stated size, repeating each measurement at least ten times and reporting the median. Every number we publish will carry the device model and the date.
Usability
Clarity of the interface
Legibility from sofa distance, information density, consistency between sections.
Use with a remote control
Whether every function is reachable with the arrow keys and OK/back alone, without a pointer.
Features
Quality of the programme guide
How well channels match their EPG data, time zone handling, how many days of schedule are loaded.
M3U support
Reading local and remote playlists, automatic refresh, group handling.
Xtream Codes support
Access through the API with a URL, username and password instead of a playlist file.
Catch-up and replay
Whether you can go back through the schedule when the source exposes it.
Favourites and ordering
Building personal lists, reordering channels, hiding groups.
Recording
Manual and scheduled recording, where the files land, behaviour in the background.
Compatibility and distribution
Device compatibility
Which platforms are genuinely supported, and the minimum operating system version.
Presence in the official stores
Distribution through Google Play, the App Store, the Amazon Appstore, the Microsoft Store or the television's own store. Apps available only as an external APK are flagged as such.
Reliability over time
Update frequency
The date of the most recent public release and how regular development is.
Advertising and interruptions
Whether ads are present, how intrusive they are, and whether paying removes them.
Permissions and privacy
Which permissions the app requests on the device, and whether a readable privacy notice exists.
Cost
Pricing model
Free, freemium, one-off purchase or subscription, and what concretely changes between the versions.
Which sources we will test on
This is the constraint that governs the timing. An honest test of an IPTV player requires a source whose content we have the right to play: we will use playlists built from streams the broadcasters themselves distribute freely and, where available, credentials supplied by authorised services.
We will not test on services that redistribute channels without rights, for a practical reason as much as a principled one: the results would be neither reproducible nor comparable, given that those services are cut off and change constantly.
What we will never do
The complete editorial rules, including those on corrections and conflicts of interest, are in the editorial policy, and who runs this site is stated without pseudonyms. How the site is funded is described on the affiliates page.
How to report an error to us
If a figure in a table is wrong or out of date, write to us: reports carrying a reference to the official source are the ones we can check fastest. The contact details are on the contact page.