Our Methodology

We want you to understand exactly what you're looking at when you browse rankings on this site. This page explains how we collect, organise, and maintain the boxing rankings you see here.

1. What our rankings represent

Our tables aim to show, in one place, how major sanctioning bodies currently rate fighters in each weight class.

We focus on official rankings published by recognised boxing organisations: the WBA, WBC, IBF and WBO.

We may also display derived information such as summaries, counts by country, or historical comparisons that we calculate ourselves based on those rankings.

The official organisations remain the ultimate authority for their own rankings. Our site is an independent compilation and presentation of that information.

2. Where the data comes from

Our primary sources are publicly available documents and pages published by the sanctioning bodies themselves, such as:

Ranking lists on their official websites.

Publicly posted PDF bulletins or circulars.

Archived ranking documents that are available to the general public.

Whenever possible, we include a "Source" reference or link near the relevant rankings so you can verify them directly on the official site.

3. How we collect and update rankings

To build and maintain our database, we use a combination of:

Human review and data entry of publicly available ranking documents.

Internal tools that assist with detecting when new rankings are published and help with formatting and consistency checks.

Our process is designed to:

Identify when a new monthly ranking list has been made public.

Extract the factual elements needed for our tables, such as:

Fighter name, Weight class, Organisation, Rank/status (champion, interim, etc.), Country.

Store that information in our own database structure, rather than copying the look and feel of the original tables or PDFs

We aim to reflect each organisation's official monthly updates and, where possible, retain historical snapshots so you can see how rankings change over time.

4. Normalisation & data cleaning

Different organisations format their lists in different ways. To make them easier to compare, we apply some standardisation, for example:

Name normalisation: Unifying obvious aliases or abbreviations (e.g. using one consistent spelling for a fighter across all lists). For example, "Oleksandr Usyk" and "O. Usyk" are the same fighter.

Weight-class mapping: Mapping similar labels to a single category (e.g. "Jr. Welterweight" and "Super Lightweight" treated as the same division).

Country codes: Converting various country abbreviations into a consistent internal format so we can show flags and stats more reliably. For example, "USA" and "United States" are the same country.

These steps are purely organisational. They do not change how a sanctioning body ranks a fighter, they only affect how we display and compare the information.

5. Independence and affiliation

This site is not owned by, operated by, endorsed by, or officially affiliated with any boxing sanctioning body or promoter.

All organisation names, abbreviations, and logos (where mentioned or referred to) are the property of their respective owners.

References to bodies such as the WBA, WBC, IBF and WBO are for identification and reporting purposes only, to explain where the underlying rankings originate.

Our role is to aggregate and present rankings in a unified format, not to replace or override the official lists.

6. Accuracy, delays and corrections

We make reasonable efforts to keep the rankings accurate and up to date, but there may be a delay between an organisation publishing new rankings and our site reflecting those changes.

Human or technical errors can occur when data is entered, interpreted, or normalised.

In case of conflicts, the official organisation's published rankings always take precedence over our presentation.

If you see something that looks wrong, outdated or inconsistent with an official list, please contact us. We review reported issues and correct our data where appropriate.

7. Historical data

Where we show past months' rankings, we intend those to be a snapshot of how each organisation's rankings appeared at that time.

Historical tables are based on documents that were publicly available when we captured them.

Occasionally, organisations may later amend or remove older documents; in those cases we may still retain the earlier snapshot in our archive, but the official site is the final reference point for any dispute.

8. Data verification and quality assurance

Ensuring data accuracy is a critical part of our methodology. We employ several quality assurance measures:

Source verification: Every ranking entry is cross-referenced with the official source document to ensure accuracy. We verify fighter names, rankings, countries, and weight classes against the original publication.

Consistency checks: Our internal systems check for inconsistencies, such as fighters appearing in multiple weight classes simultaneously or ranking positions that don't make logical sense.

Manual review: All data undergoes manual review before publication. This human oversight helps catch errors that automated systems might miss.

User feedback: We actively encourage users to report errors and investigate all reports promptly. User feedback is an important part of our quality assurance process.

Despite these measures, errors can occur. When they do, we correct them as quickly as possible and update our processes to prevent similar issues in the future.

9. Handling edge cases and special situations

Boxing rankings can present various edge cases and special situations that require careful handling:

Interim champions: When a champion is unable to defend their title, organizations may designate an interim champion. We include interim champions in our listings and clearly mark them as such.

Vacant titles: When a title becomes vacant, we note this in our listings. Rankings continue to be published even when a division has no champion.

Weight class changes: When fighters move between weight classes, we update their listings accordingly. Historical rankings preserve their position in their previous division.

10. Technical implementation

Our technical infrastructure is designed to ensure reliability, performance, and accuracy:

Database structure: Rankings are stored in a structured database that allows for efficient querying, historical tracking, and cross-referencing across organizations and weight classes.

Update process: Our update process is designed to minimize errors and ensure consistency. New rankings are processed through multiple validation steps before being published.

Historical preservation: We maintain a complete historical archive that preserves rankings as they were at each point in time. This allows users to view rankings from any month in our archive.

Search and navigation: Our search functionality allows users to find fighters, countries, and rankings quickly and accurately. We've optimized our database structure to support fast, accurate searches.

Data integrity: We use database constraints and validation rules to ensure data integrity and prevent inconsistencies from being introduced.

11. Transparency and disclosure

We believe in transparency about our methodology and processes. This page is part of that commitment, but we also:

Document our sources: Whenever possible, we include links or references to the official sources we use, allowing users to verify our data.

Explain our decisions: When we make normalization or standardization decisions, we document them and explain our reasoning.

Admit limitations: We're transparent about the limitations of our data, including potential delays, the possibility of errors, and the fact that official organizations are the ultimate authority.

Welcome feedback: We encourage users to provide feedback, report errors, and ask questions about our methodology. This feedback helps us improve our processes and accuracy.

12. Future improvements

We're constantly working to improve Box-Rank and our methodology. Areas we're focusing on include:

Faster updates: Reducing the time between official publication and our site updates.

Enhanced accuracy: Improving our verification processes and error detection systems.

Better normalization: Refining our name and data normalization to handle edge cases better.

More historical data: Expanding our historical archive to include older rankings where available.

Improved user experience: Making it easier to find, compare, and understand rankings.

We welcome suggestions for improvements and are always looking for ways to make Box-Rank more valuable for the boxing community.

13. Use of our compiled data

The way we combine, structure and present the rankings on this site is our own work product.

You're welcome to browse and use the site for personal, non-commercial purposes.

Automated extraction, bulk copying, or commercial re-use of our compiled rankings may be restricted by our own terms of use.

If you're interested in using our compiled data for a project, please get in touch so we can discuss appropriate options.

For more information about how rankings work in general, visit our How Rankings Work guide. If you have questions about our methodology or notice any issues with the data, please contact us.