How Flight4's Flight Platform Ratings Work
Hands-on research, then the score
- 18 Metrics scored
- 11 Platforms rated
- 0 Paid placements
- Jul 2026 Research compiled
At Flight4, every star rating and platform review starts with real, hands-on research, not a formula borrowed from somewhere else, and never a paid placement. We visit each platform directly, test the process end-to-end, and cross-check what we find against independent third-party sources. Our own historical data, built up since 2006, feeds into the picture too. For certain research tasks (cross-referencing third-party ratings across many sources, or researching detailed coverage facts that would take considerable time to verify by hand) we also use AI as part of the process, working alongside our own direct testing rather than instead of it.
The metrics we choose to measure, the judgement calls behind every score, and the final ratings are all Flight4’s own. AI helps us analyse data at scale and present our findings clearly and consistently; it supports the research, it doesn’t replace the judgement behind it. We think how a rating is made matters as much as the rating itself, which is why we’re upfront about all of this.
Where third-party figures come from. For flights, they do not come into the scoring at all. Every one of the 18 metrics on this page comes from our own hands-on testing of each platform, carried out in July 2026, and no external review score is cited in our flight platform ratings. Third-party research does inform our wider background reading, but it shapes what we go and check for ourselves rather than feeding a score directly.
This page explains how that process works for flight booking platforms specifically. For the actual ratings and reviews themselves, see our Compare Flight Ticket Suppliers page.
18 metrics, four areas
Search and usability
Ease of use, results display, filter options, price range selection, multi-date search, price alerts.
Coverage
Airline coverage, budget and low-cost carrier coverage, multi-destination and multi-city support.
Booking and value
The reservation process itself, rewards programmes, membership savings, travel add-ons, special offers.
Trust and planning
Cross-comparison ability, destination inspiration tools, itinerary storage, and consumer protection such as ATOL.
Every platform gets scored on all 18, whether it’s a full booking agency or a pure search-comparison tool, which is deliberate, and explained below.
Six bands, every metric
Each metric is scored 0–5, in the same six bands throughout:
| Score | What it means |
|---|---|
| 5.0 | Industry-leading, best-in-class |
| 4.0–4.9 | Very good, above average |
| 3.0–3.9 | Good, functional but with limitations |
| 2.0–2.9 | Below average, notable gaps |
| 1.0–1.9 | Minimal or absent functionality |
| 0.0–0.9 | Feature not offered |
Two honest limitations, stated plainly
Equal weighting has a real effect on the results.
All 18 metrics count the same, which naturally favours full-service travel agencies: they score on rewards programmes, membership savings, and consumer protection, which pure search-comparison platforms don’t offer by design. Those comparison platforms, in turn, consistently score higher on search-specific metrics like filters, price alerts, and date flexibility. If lowest price and fastest search matter more to you than rewards or protection, it’s worth weighting those specific metrics more heavily yourself rather than reading only the overall average.
“Complete airline coverage” is necessarily an approximation.
No platform (ours or anyone’s) has genuine live access to every seat on every airline globally, so this metric measures breadth of coverage and how current the availability shown is, not literal completeness.
Why the same platform scores differently on different metrics
Take “Reservation process”: Expedia scores 4.4, Skyscanner scores 3.4. That’s not Skyscanner being worse at its job. Expedia completes the entire booking on-platform: search, payment, and confirmation, with rewards applied automatically at checkout. Skyscanner is a metasearch engine: it compares prices, then sends you to the airline or a booking site to actually complete the purchase. That’s a real, structural difference in what happens at the point of booking, not a matter of taste, and it’s exactly what this specific metric is measuring.
The same two platforms flip on other metrics: Skyscanner leads decisively on filter options and price alerts, where Expedia falls behind. Neither platform is simply “better”: the ratings are built to show you where each one is strong, not to collapse everything into a single winner.
Keeping this current
This research was compiled in July 2026 and reflects our assessment as of that date. Platform features, pricing, and loyalty programmes change over time; we review and refresh our ratings periodically, and the comparison page always shows when it was last reviewed.
Full comparison and individual platform reviews.
Flight booking platforms
Compare the flight booking platforms
Ratings, the full table and every review.
Buying guide
What to check before you book, and what catches people out.
Start a search
Search and compare live, then book with the supplier.
The other 5 comparison indexes
Compare booking platforms
All six comparison indexes in one place.
Start a search
Flights, hotels, car hire and tickets, in one place.
How we rate platforms
One published method per sector, and why.