Methodology
How we compare chess AI helpers
What we look at, where the facts come from, and how we deal with ranking our own product.
This site ranks ChessHelper (chesshelper.ai) first, and ChessHelper is made by the same team that runs this site. That is a conflict of interest, and the only honest way to handle it is to show our working. This page explains the criteria, the sources and the limits of what we did.
What we did and did not do
We compared published features and pricing. For every tool, we read the company's own website (product pages, pricing pages, help centers and FAQs) during November 2026 and took facts only from there. Where a company's pages contradict themselves, we say so or leave the detail out. We did not run a hands-on test lab, time any tools, or survey users, and we do not publish star ratings or scores that would suggest otherwise.
Every chess move, line and evaluation printed on this site was checked separately. We verified legality of each line with the chess.js library and checked engine claims with Stockfish at depth 18 to 20. Evaluations are rounded and given as approximate, because they shift slightly with depth and engine version.
The five criteria
The ranking weighs five things, in this order of importance. The order reflects the site's purpose: helping people learn chess, not finding the strongest engine.
| Criterion | What we ask |
|---|---|
| Learning fit | Can the advice be pitched at the player's level? Does the tool encourage you to think first? |
| Where it works | Does it work where people already play and study, on which devices? |
| Explanation | Does it say why, in words, or only show moves and numbers? |
| Cost | What does the free tier allow, and what do paid plans cost as listed? |
| Fair-play framing | Does the tool present itself as a study aid and respect platform rules? |
Tools that win a criterion outright get a “best for” label even when they rank lower overall. Lichess is best on cost, DecodeChess on explanation and Chess.com on convenience for Chess.com players.
Why ChessHelper ranks first, and the checks on that
ChessHelper ranks first because it scores best on learning fit (strength adjustable from 800 to 3200 Elo) and on where it works (one extension for Chess.com and Lichess). To keep that from becoming a sales pitch, we follow four rules:
- Every ChessHelper weakness we know about is listed, including the Chrome-only support, the daily free limit and the shorter explanations.
- Every other tool is described from its own website, with its best category named.
- We do not invent tests, testers, reviews or ratings for any product, ours included.
- The disclosure appears on every page, in the header and the footer.
Videos
Reviews include a video when the company's official channel, or a clearly relevant tutorial, explains the product. We check each video's title and channel before adding it, and we leave out any video that shows engine help being used in games against people. Videos load only when you press play, through YouTube's privacy-enhanced mode; see the privacy page.
Updates and corrections
We review prices and features at least every few months and whenever a reader reports a change. Every page shows its publication date. If you find an error, email [email protected] with the page and the correct information, ideally with a link to the company's own page. We correct verified errors and note significant changes on the page.
Companies that want a correction to their entry are welcome to write too. We do not accept payment for placement, and no tool on the list pays us.