SingLink VPN vs VPN Cat

SingLink VPN

Read the full review

8.4evidence coverage 83% (not a second score)

provably between 6.94 and 8.54

VPN Cat

Read the full review

5.2evidence coverage 44% (not a second score)

provably between 2.30 and 7.55

The evidence cannot separate these two.

Neither provider's guaranteed minimum clears the other's best possible maximum over the dimensions we have not measured, so their provable intervals overlap. Whichever headline is higher, the evidence does not support calling one better, as our own measurements fill in, a real separation may appear.

Score by dimension

Dimension	SingLink VPN	VPN Cat
Privacy	9.2Documented50% assessed	5.9Documented44% assessed≤7.2
Security	8.5Measured67% assessed	, No evidence
Transparency	4.5Documented67% assessed	0.7Documented33% assessed
Server authenticity	, No evidence	, No evidence
Server locations	10.0Vendor-claimed33% assessed	, No evidence
Streaming	9.5Measured	, No evidence
Speed	, No evidence	, No evidence
Device compatibility	9.1Documented64% assessed	10.0Documented18% assessed
Usability	8.0Documented	, No evidence
Torrenting	8.0Documented50% assessed	10.0Documented25% assessed
Additional features	9.7Documented44% assessed	, No evidence

A dash is a dimension we hold no evidence on; it is excluded from the weighted mean rather than counted as zero. “≤” marks a ceiling, a cap applied because the input is vendor-claimed or measured by others, so the score cannot reach the top of the scale. “assessed” is the share of the dimension's rules that had evidence to act on.

Reading a score

Measured: We produced this number ourselves and can reproduce it.
Documented: Read out of a primary document: a privacy policy, an audit report, or source code.
Vendor-claimed: Asserted by the provider. We have not independently verified it, and the score is capped accordingly.
No evidence: We found nothing to score. The dimension is excluded from the weighted mean rather than counted as zero.