Rankings Methodology

How asia.storage computes its self-storage facility rankings — weighted score formula, review thresholds, data sources, fraud review, and refresh cadence.

How asia.storage identifies Asia's best self-storage facilities: the score formula, the sample-size thresholds behind each badge, where the review data comes from, how suspected review fraud is handled, and how often the board recomputes.

Weighted score

The default rank is review_count × rating². Squaring the rating rewards facilities that maintain high quality at scale. A 4.9-star facility with 1,000 reviews (score 24,010) outranks a 2.5-star facility with 3,000 reviews (18,750).

Sample-size thresholds

Most reviewed (city): at least 20 reviews. Most reviewed (market): at least 100 reviews. Most reviewed (Asia): at least 500 reviews.

Best in city: at least 50 reviews and 4.0 stars. Best in market: at least 200 reviews and 4.3 stars. Best in Asia: at least 1,000 reviews and 4.5 stars.

Top 10 Asia leaderboard: at least 500 reviews and 4.5 stars. Sorting by rating applies a 20-review floor so tiny samples cannot win.

Data source

Review counts and star ratings come from public Google Reviews, refreshed on a rolling schedule by the asia.storage research team. Each pull is stored as an append-only snapshot so historical comparisons stay honest.

Fraud review

Facilities showing a rating above 4.95 with more than 200 reviews are automatically excluded pending manual review. A facility can be cleared once verified, or permanently excluded if the pattern looks synthetic. Cleared facilities re-enter every future recomputation.

Refresh cadence

Badges and rankings recompute automatically whenever facility review data, status or fraud status changes. A daily 03:00 UTC job re-runs the full computation as a safety net.

Corrections

Spotted a mistake, or think a facility is missing from the board? Email ops@asia.storage and the research team will review it.