How the B4 Score works

How ties are broken

Two creators can land on the same score. When that happens the order is decided by a fixed, published sequence — never by chance, and never by who we happened to add first:

1. Engagement ratio — how much of their audience actually turns up for their recent work.
2. Activity — who has been consistently putting the work in.
3. Longest on the board — the creator who has been tracked and scored the longest.

Every component is measured on a continuous scale rather than in blocks, so creators who performed differently get different scores instead of being rounded into the same bucket.

How often it updates

Once a day, at 08:15 UTC. Every run appends to the record rather than overwriting it, so a creator's history is permanent and their movement is verifiable. Some components need history before they can say anything — early in a season, scores sit closer together until there is enough record to separate them. We would rather show a flat board than a dramatic invented one.

Movement arrows only appear when there is a like-for-like comparison to make. On a creator's first ranked day, or on any day the size of the cohort changed, positions shift for reasons that have nothing to do with performance — so we show no movement rather than crediting someone with a climb they didn't earn.

Scores were recalculated on a refined model on 26 July 2026, and again on 27 July 2026 after we found the momentum component was resting on a placeholder rather than a measurement. Earlier scores are kept exactly as they were recorded; movement is never measured across either change, and score charts mark the break rather than drawing through it.

When a component can't be measured

Not every platform publishes everything. Kick, for instance, exposes no follower count and no view history at all. Where a component has nothing behind it, we show not yet measurable rather than a zero — a zero is a result, and we didn't get one.

Momentum needs about a week of tracking before a creator's growth can be compared against their own history, so it reads as not yet measurable until then.

An unmeasured component contributes nothing, and we do not spread its weight across the others to make the total look complete. That means a creator we can only partly read scores lower than one we can read fully — which is the honest outcome. The alternative is a gap in our data quietly becoming a creator's advantage, and we would rather rank someone below where they might belong than above where we can prove they do.

Who gets a rank

Every creator on the roster is tracked, scored and listed. A position on the board needs one more thing: an audience of at least about a thousand on a platform we can read.

That is not a judgement about small creators — this is a board built for people before they break, and size fit deliberately counts being early in a creator's favour. It is about what the arithmetic can support. Engagement is views divided by followers, and below a few hundred followers that stops being a rate and becomes noise: one video shared once moves it further than a year of real work moves an established channel's. Combined with a size score that already rewards being small, an account with a hundred followers can sweep two components without having done anything. A rank built that way measures our formula, not the creator.

So below the threshold we show the score and withhold the rank, and say which it is. It resolves on its own as an audience grows — nothing needs to be applied for.