(Match.com’s user base is slightly older, too, which may indicate more people who are ready to settle down.) However, Match lacks the robust matching algorithm of Ok Cupid — it came in fourth place for good matches in our testing — and isn’t as streamlined as Tinder or Bumble. We also tested three other sites: e Harmony, Plenty of Fish, and Zoosk.
While we can’t recommend them, we hope we can save you the trouble of experiencing them yourself.
And it’s easy to get started: upload a few snaps from your Facebook profile, add an optional bio, and start swiping through other users in your area.
Even though we received fewer messages compared to other sites, we rated 40 percent “good” — the most out of the seven sites we tested.
The same set of photos is often used under many names, or the same name can be used with different photos.
We like Ok Cupid's whole package — a huge user base, slick interface, the fact that it’s free — but its real strength lies in its robust matching algorithm.
But of course, without your voice, it’s hard for your personality to shine through in your profile.Zoosk took it one step further — you’ll pay a monthly subscription for low-quality matches.Matchmaker and online dating expert Carmelia Ray points out that “as a user, you want to have the most selection and options.”) but also lets you rate how important a potential match’s answers to those same questions are.No other dating site works as hard to deliver you the exact right partners, and that means results: In our testing, we found the highest percentage of good matches with Ok Cupid, and the second-highest percentage of high-quality messages.
Good online dating profiles are both extremely important and surprisingly hard to find.