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. 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.