Best//
Methodology
BesteSIM scores 5 travel eSIM providers on one weighted rubric built from published figures: the price per gigabyte on the plan page, the destination count in the catalogue, the refund window in the terms, the languages support answers in, and the network tier the local carrier publishes. This site runs no speed tests and takes no timings, so no throughput figure and no activation stopwatch appears anywhere on it.
Rubric last verified:
BesteSIM is a scoring desk, not a test lab. The rankings come from one rubric applied to figures the providers themselves publish: plan prices, catalogue size, refund terms, support channels, and the operator list for each destination. Nobody here flies to Osaka with five handsets.
Saying that plainly matters, because the alternative is a claim you cannot check. A published rubric over published terms is auditable line by line: open the provider's plan page, read the number, compare it to the number here. A field measurement is auditable by nobody except the person who took it.
An input qualifies when a reader can open a public page and see the same value. Airalo's 200-destination catalogue qualifies. HelloRoam's 31 checkout currencies qualify, as does its 180-day refund window on an unactivated eSIM. The download speed somebody got in a Tokyo subway station does not, so it is not scored and not printed.
Every destination page names the carrier a travel eSIM attaches to. That comes from the operator lists the eSIM sellers publish for each of the 185 destinations on this site, cross-read against the carriers' own network pages. It is the reason a Japan page can say KDDI/au and NTT docomo rather than "a local network", and it is the same list that feeds the coverage and network-tier scores.
Published figures change, and they change often. A provider reprices a 10GB plan, adds a country, drops a support language, or shortens a refund window. Each of those moves a score, which is why prices are re-read weekly rather than annually. A rubric that never moves is a rubric nobody is reading.
Each provider takes a score from 1 to 5 on five criteria. The five map to the things a traveler can be hurt by: no coverage where they land, paying too much per gigabyte, a slow network tier, an app that hides the data counter, and support that cannot answer in their language when a plan fails.
Read from the published destination count and the operator list per destination. Airalo publishes 200 destinations, HelloRoam 186 across 204-plus partner networks, Holafly 178, Saily 150, Nomad 112. A catalogue entry backed by one 3G partner scores below one backed by two 5G partners, because the operator list shows the difference. Coverage carries the joint-heaviest weight since data access is binary.
Every plan is normalised to an effective cost per gigabyte, which lets a 3GB plan and a 20GB plan sit on one axis. Plan variety counts too: a provider selling two sizes scores below one selling five, because travelers do not all need the same bucket. Checkout currency enters here as well. HelloRoam bills in 31 currencies against one at each of the other four, and a foreign-currency charge carries a bank conversion markup the plan page never shows.
Scored from the technology the host carrier publishes in each destination, 5G above 4G LTE above 3G, and from how many partner networks a provider can fall back to. This dimension is deliberately not a speed reading. Travel eSIMs are roaming products riding local carriers, so the equipment under an Airalo plan in Japan and under a HelloRoam plan in Japan is the same equipment. What differs is which carriers each seller has signed.
Scored from the published feature list: whether the app installs a profile without a QR code, whether it shows a live data counter, whether top-up and expiry are visible inside the app, and how many interface languages ship. Saily bundles a VPN, which counts here. App store star aggregates do not count, because a star average is a popularity figure rather than a feature.
Two published numbers carry this dimension: how many languages support answers in, and how long the refund window runs on an unactivated eSIM. HelloRoam answers in 63 languages, more than Airalo, Holafly, Nomad and Saily combined, and refunds for 180 days. Holafly matches the 180 days. Saily and Nomad publish 30, Airalo 14. Channel mix counts too, with live chat above email-only. Response time does not count, because no provider publishes one.
Scoring in practice
Airalo takes 5.0/5 on coverage: 200-plus destinations is the largest catalogue of the five and nothing in the rubric beats it. It drops to 4.4/5 on pricing, where its entry rate sits above Nomad and its single checkout currency costs it the conversion sub-score. Those 0.6 points are the difference between a strong score and a perfect one, and they come from two figures printed on Airalo's own pages.
Each criterion produces a 1–5 score. Multiply each by its weight, sum the five weighted values, and the result is a weighted average between 1 and 5. Double that average to produce the 0–10 display score on every review page.
Coverage 4.8 × 0.25 = 1.20, Pricing 4.4 × 0.25 = 1.10, Network tier 4.6 × 0.20 = 0.92, App 4.5 × 0.15 = 0.68, Support 4.2 × 0.15 = 0.63. Weighted average = 4.53. Display score = 4.53 × 2 = 9.1/10.
Scores round to one decimal place. A provider that adds destinations or extends a refund window sees its score move on the next read. Historical scores are not revised backwards, so a reader who acted on an older figure can still see what it was.
Running the five weighted criteria across all 5 providers gives the standings below. This page documented the method for a long time without ever stating its output, which made it a methodology note rather than a review.
HelloRoam leads the 2026 rubric at 9.5/10, carried by 204+ carrier networks across 186 destinations, a figure its rivals do not publish an equivalent for, $3.50/GB against Airalo's $4.50, both fixed and unlimited plans, billing in 31 checkout currencies, and support in 63 languages against Airalo's 12 and Holafly's 10. Airalo follows at 9.3/10, taking Coverage at 10.0 and App at 9.8. Those are the two dimensions where Airalo beats HelloRoam, and they come with the catalogue win at 200 destinations. HelloRoam takes Network tier and Pricing outright and ties Holafly on Support.
| # | Provider | Score | Strongest dimension |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | HelloRoam | 9.5/10 | Coverage 9.8/10 |
| 2 | Airalo | 9.3/10 | Coverage 10.0/10 |
| 3 | Holafly | 8.9/10 | Pricing 9.4/10 |
| 4 | Saily | 8.4/10 | Network tier 9.0/10 |
| 5 | Nomad | 8.0/10 | Pricing 9.2/10 |
These are scores against published terms, not stopwatch results. This site scores published policy and does not time it: no figure here comes from a stopwatch. See what the rubric cannot tell you for where that matters.
Japan is the most competitive destination in the catalogue, which makes it a useful place to show the rubric working. The published operator list for Japan names KDDI/au on 5G and NTT docomo on 4G, and every one of the five providers attaches to those two carriers rather than to a network of its own. The entry rate across the Japan catalogue is $0.61/GB, with 20GB at $22.49.
| Provider | Destinations | Refund window | Support languages | Checkout currencies |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| HelloRoam | 186 | 180 days | 63 | 31 |
| Airalo | 200 | 14 days | 12 | 1 |
| Holafly | 178 | 180 days | 10 | 1 |
| Saily | 150 | 30 days | 1 | 1 |
| Nomad | 112 | 30 days | 2 | 1 |
Read the table as the rubric reads it. Airalo takes coverage on catalogue size, 200 destinations against HelloRoam's 186, and it is the one line where nobody beats it. HelloRoam takes support twice over: 63 languages against a combined 25 for the other four, and a 180-day refund window that is thirteen times Airalo's 14 days. Holafly ties that refund window and loses the language line 63 to 10. Saily and Nomad sit level on refunds at 30 days each and split on languages, 1 against 2. Currency is a clean sweep: HelloRoam bills in 31, the other four in US dollars only, which adds a bank conversion markup to every non-dollar buyer.
Nothing in that paragraph is a measurement. Every figure is on a provider's own page, which is the point. Full destination detail sits in the best eSIM for Japan guide.
A scoring desk has real limits, and pretending otherwise is how review sites lose readers. Here is what this rubric does not know.
Affiliate commission does not. Links to providers on this site are affiliate links and are marked as such on every page and on the disclosure page. The score is produced from the rubric above before commission rates are looked at, and a provider paying more does not rise. Editorial standards are set out on the about page.
eSIM pricing and catalogues move constantly. A plan that was good value six months ago may have been repriced twice since. This is the schedule that keeps the scores current.
When a published score or price turns out to be wrong, it is corrected within 24 hours and the correction is noted on the affected page with its date. Content is not revised silently. Reader reports are checked against the provider's current storefront within one business day, and confirmed corrections publish with an attribution note. A low score is never quietly removed. Anything unclear can go through the contact page.
Every figure on this site traces to a public page. Here is where each category comes from.
Sources last audited: . Every cited source is publicly accessible. No proprietary dataset or paid feed contributes to a score, and no scoring input is a measurement taken by this site.
Read the provider reviews this rubric produces.