How we rank
Every profile here carries a number from 0 to 100 in the corner of her poster, and the top ten on the front page is sorted by it. This is what the number counts.
What goes in
Four things, and they are weighted the way they are because three of them describe a career and the fourth describes what other people thought of it.
| Part | Max | What it reads |
|---|---|---|
| Scene volume | 31 | How many scenes we hold for her, on a log scale: the step from 5 to 50 is worth far more than the step from 200 to 250. |
| Spread | 30 | How many different sites and how many different studio families her credits cross. Ten sites and five families max it out. |
| Recency | 30 | When she last shot. A release inside twelve months takes the whole thing, two to three years back takes most of it, and a profile with no dated scene at all keeps a floor of a few points. |
| Awards | 10 | Wins and nominations from the boards we track. A win counts as five nominations, because a shortlist runs long and a verdict does not. |
The score is recomputed from the database every time the catalogue changes, not written by hand and not adjustable per person. Nobody can pay to move it, and we do not move it for a partner: the affiliate links on this site pay us either way, and a ranking we edit for money is worth nothing to the reader who came here to find out who is worth watching.
Why the numbers look low
The highest score on this site right now is 74, Natalie Mars, and the median sits at 26. On a database of mainstream performers the same formula puts dozens of people above 90. That gap is not a judgement about trans performers, it is arithmetic about our index.
Spread is the part that does it. It rewards credits across ten sites and five studio families, and we currently card 9 sites. A performer who has shot for four of them has run out of room to score, however good the work is. The same goes for volume: we count the scenes we have actually read off a studio tour, not everything she ever filmed.
So the number is honest about our coverage rather than about her career, and it will move as the index grows. If you think a profile is badly placed, the useful thing to send us is a site we are missing, not an argument about the ranking.
What it does not count
Looks, body type, ethnicity, whether she is pre-op or post-op, follower counts, and how much traffic a profile gets on this site. None of it touches the score. Social following was the tempting one to add and we left it out: it measures how well somebody works a feed, which is a different job from the one this database is about.
One more thing worth saying plainly. The score counts every credit we hold for a performer, including her work on mainstream sites that are not trans catalogues. A career does not stop at the edge of a niche and neither does the count.
Where to look
The ranked list lives on the front page and the full roster is at every performer we have, where you can sort by scenes and by last release instead of by score. Award records, which feed the fourth part, are at awards and nominations.