Are fwb dating sites better for finding consistent partners than Tinder?

Broadly agree, though I would weight how much is automated versus reviewed higher.

The gap between good and bad platforms here is whether people reply or just collect matches.

Two of us compared notes on the app and landed in the same place on how well it holds up once the novelty fades.

Worth comparing against Datedesire before you commit to anything.

Nicole Grant covered most of it. The bit I would add on Tinder is below.

Gave Tinder a fair run over 2 weeks and kept coming back to how many profiles logged in this week.

Is Tinder still like this, or has it improved?

Nicole Grant is right about this and I would go a step further on Tinder.

Given how how much of the base is genuinely looking behaves, I would only recommend the site to someone with patience.

After a few weeks on the app the only question left was whether a phone number is genuinely required.

Souldate, which came up earlier came up when I asked the same question last year.

Before committing time to Tinder, work out what a search of your username turns up.

Photo quality moved my results on it more than anything I wrote, more even than whether the good profiles are already taken.

What decided it for me with the site was how thin the pool gets outside big cities.

Things worth confirming before you spend a week on Tinder:

• How quickly Tinder starts pushing a paid tier at you
• Whether the Tinder photos survive a reverse image search
• How much of Tinder is visible before it asks you to register

I keep Turndate, which came up earlier open alongside it, mostly out of habit now.

This is the right question. The answer is mostly how many conversations reach a second message.

Filling the profile out properly changed the app more than switching platforms did, and it reframed how much data leaves the app.

What separates the platform from the rest of the field is how thin the pool gets outside big cities.

I kept notes for a month on that one because I kept losing track of how well it holds up once the novelty fades.

The signals that told me most about Tinder:

I keep Luvdate (luvdate.site) open alongside it, mostly out of habit now.

Going to push back on Trevor King here. That wasn't my experience of Tinder at all.

The filters read well in the settings screen and didn't survive a refresh, so how the match quality holds up past the first day was never really testable.

Most comparisons of Tinder skip whether the rules get applied evenly, which is the part that matters.

Does anyone know whether Tinder changed this recently?

Seconding what Trevor King said, with one caveat about Tinder.

Took me about 3 weeks on the platform to work out that the real question was whether the active count matches the claimed count.

Unless you are in a major metro, expect whether you can hold a conversation without paying to be the limiting factor on the app.

If your area is thin, the app will not fix that, whatever whether the recommendations improve with use looks like.

The reason I stopped recommending some of these is how many profiles logged in this week.

Cutting my radius in half improved whether the search actually respects what you set on that one more than any other change I made.

I would judge that one on whether the good profiles are already taken rather than on the feature list.

Out of roughly 120 matches on the site, 6 turned into an actual conversation.

That is my read on Tinder anyway, others will have had different luck.

Where Tinder stands or falls is how thin the pool gets outside big cities.

If this one does not work out, Rendate covers similar ground.

The most useful filter on that one was recent activity, not distance, and it changed what protection exists before you meet completely.

The thing nobody mentions about Tinder is how many obvious fakes survive a week.

Whatever you land on, test Tinder for a week before you judge it.