Skip to content
Archery Care

Version 1.1.0 · Updated June 2026

The CareScore™ Methodology

Every ranking on Archery Care comes out of CareScore™— a scoring model with nothing hidden. The formula, the exact weights, the data rules, the changelog: it’s all on this page. Check our math anytime. If you cite a CareScoresomewhere, this page is the source of truth you’re pointing at.

The model in one paragraph

Each category gets a set of measurable specs. We reduce every spec to a single number, then normalise it onto a 0–100 scale against fixed per-category bounds — respecting whether higher or lower is better, because a 5.25″ brace height and a $2,149 price tag are both “big” in very different ways. Each normalised value gets multiplied by a published weight. Average the weighted values, and that’s the score. 0 to 100, higher is better. That’s the whole machine.

The formula

For a numeric spec with raw value x, bounds min and max(the ratio is clamped to the 0–1 range, so values outside the bounds score 0 or 100):

  • Higher-is-better: quality = clamp₀₋₁((x − min) ÷ (max − min)) × 100
  • Lower-is-better: quality = 100 − clamp₀₋₁((x − min) ÷ (max − min)) × 100
  • Ranges (e.g. draw-weight 55–80 lb) are reduced to a scalar first — the midpoint, span, or upper bound, as published per spec below.
  • Categorical specs (e.g. limb fitting: ILF vs proprietary) map to a published 0–100 quality value per option.

The overall CareScore is the weight-normalised average: Σ(qualityᵢ × weightᵢ) ÷ Σ(weightᵢ), computed over the specs that have data.

Three rules that keep the score honest

  • Missing data is never treated as zero.If a manufacturer doesn’t publish a spec, we store it as unknown, exclude it, and renormalise the remaining weights — we never guess. The honest consequence: a score built on fewer specs leans harder on the specs that remain, which is why the data note under each product’s table tells you exactly what was unavailable.
  • Reference-only specs are excluded.Some published figures aren’t comparable across designs (e.g. Ravin’s geared “draw force” vs a conventional peak draw weight). These are shown in tables but never scored.
  • Commissions never touch the math. Archery Care runs no affiliate links or ads today, and if that ever changes the score will still be computed from specs by the formula above — there is no editorial override, no sponsored placement, and no manual adjustment. Ever.

Avatar re-weighting (the “Best for…” lists)

A beginner and a Western elk hunter shouldn’t use the same weights. So they don’t. Our buyer-specific lists take the same normalised data and re-weight it for one kind of archer — the beginner list, for instance, cares far more about forgiveness and price than raw speed, because a twitchy 357 fps bow helps nobody who’s still building an anchor. The weights for each avatar are published on its list page. The underlying data never changes.

The exact weights, by category

These tables are rendered directly from the live scoring configuration — they cannot drift from what the site actually computes. Direction shows whether a higher or lower raw value scores better; bounds are the normalisation range.

Compound Bows

SpecDirectionNormalisationWeight (share)
IBO SpeedHigher is better330–360fps16 (16.8%)
Brace HeightHigher is better5–7"15 (15.8%)
Mass WeightLower is better3.8–4.8lb14 (14.7%)
Street PriceLower is better1200–220016 (16.8%)
Axle-to-AxleHigher is better30–34"10 (10.5%)
Let-OffHigher is better80–90%8 (8.4%)
Draw WeightHigher is better60–80lb (scored on upper bound)8 (8.4%)
Draw Length RangeHigher is better3–6" (scored on span)8 (8.4%)

Budget Compound Bows

SpecDirectionNormalisationWeight (share)
Street Price (RTH package)Lower is better180–68018 (19.6%)
Draw Weight RangeHigher is better10–70lb (scored on span)14 (15.2%)
Draw Length RangeHigher is better6–17" (scored on span)14 (15.2%)
IBO SpeedHigher is better295–330fps12 (13.0%)
Brace HeightHigher is better6–7"12 (13.0%)
Mass WeightLower is better3–4.2lb10 (10.9%)
Let-OffHigher is better75–85%6 (6.5%)
Axle-to-AxleHigher is better29–33"6 (6.5%)

Recurve Bows

SpecDirectionNormalisationWeight (share)
Competitive CeilingHigher is betterelite=100, advanced=82, intermediate=64, beginner=4618 (20.5%)
PriceLower is better140–100018 (20.5%)
Limb FittingHigher is betterILF=100, Formula=82, proprietary=5016 (18.2%)
Riser MaterialHigher is bettercarbon=100, aluminum=85, wood=5514 (15.9%)
Tuning AdjustabilityHigher is betterfull=100, partial=70, none=4012 (13.6%)
Riser MassHigher is better1100–1400g10 (11.4%)

Crossbows

SpecDirectionNormalisationWeight (share)
SpeedHigher is better360–520fps18 (18.0%)
Kinetic EnergyHigher is better140–225ft-lb16 (16.0%)
PriceLower is better550–310018 (18.0%)
Cocked WidthLower is better3.5–9.5"12 (12.0%)
Cocking SystemHigher is betterintegrated=100, crank=85, manual=6012 (12.0%)
Overall LengthLower is better24–34"8 (8.0%)
Mass WeightLower is better7–8.5lb8 (8.0%)
Power StrokeHigher is better12–16"8 (8.0%)
Draw Weightreference onlynot scored

Arrows

SpecDirectionNormalisationWeight (share)
Straightness ToleranceLower is better0.001–0.006"24 (27.9%)
Price / DozenLower is better110–50018 (20.9%)
Shaft DiameterLower is better0.157–0.246"12 (14.0%)
Weight ToleranceLower is better0.5–2gr12 (14.0%)
Spine OptionsHigher is better3–1410 (11.6%)
MaterialHigher is bettercarbon-aluminum=92, carbon=85, aluminum=7210 (11.6%)

Broadheads

SpecDirectionNormalisationWeight (share)
Cutting DiameterHigher is better1–2.25"18 (23.7%)
Price (3 heads)Lower is better35–14516 (21.1%)
Blade ThicknessHigher is better0.03–0.065"14 (18.4%)
Ferrule MaterialHigher is bettertitanium=100, steel=70, aluminum=3512 (15.8%)
Crossbow RatedHigher is betteryes=100, no=408 (10.5%)
Grain OptionsHigher is better1–88 (10.5%)
Head Typereference onlyfixed=0, mechanical=0, hybrid=0not scored
Blade Countreference only2–4not scored

Arrow Rests

SpecDirectionNormalisationWeight (share)
Street PriceLower is better70–31020 (27.0%)
Micro-AdjustHigher is betteryes=100, no=4016 (21.6%)
Rest TypeHigher is betterlimb-driven-dropaway=90, cable-driven-dropaway=88, full-containment=55, launcher=4514 (18.9%)
ContainmentHigher is betterfull=100, partial=55, none=2514 (18.9%)
MountingHigher is betterboth=100, integrate-dovetail=80, berger-bolt=6510 (13.5%)

Bow Sights

SpecDirectionNormalisationWeight (share)
Street PriceLower is better180–66018 (27.3%)
Axis AdjustmentHigher is betterfirst-second-third=100, second-only=45, none=1518 (27.3%)
MountingHigher is betterboth=100, dovetail=80, fixed-plate=5012 (18.2%)
Adjustment PrecisionHigher is bettermicro=100, standard=4510 (15.2%)
Sight Light IncludedHigher is betteryes=100, no=308 (12.1%)
Pin Countreference only1–7not scored
Pin Sizereference only0.01–0.029"not scored

Release Aids

SpecDirectionNormalisationWeight (share)
Street PriceLower is better90–33020 (29.4%)
Trigger AdjustabilityHigher is betterfull=100, partial=55, none=2026 (38.2%)
Jaw / HookHigher is betterhook=100, jaw-less=85, single-caliper=60, dual-caliper=4516 (23.5%)
ConnectionHigher is betterboth=100, wrist-strap=70, handheld=706 (8.8%)
Release Stylereference onlyindex=0, thumb=0, hinge=0, tension=0not scored

Stabilizers

SpecDirectionNormalisationWeight (share)
Street PriceLower is better35–21520 (33.3%)
Integrated DampingHigher is betteryes=100, no=3018 (30.0%)
Bar MaterialHigher is bettercarbon=100, hybrid=70, aluminum=45, polymer=3014 (23.3%)
LengthHigher is better6–15"8 (13.3%)
Weightreference only3–16oznot scored
Adjustable End Weightsreference onlyyes=100, no=0not scored

Longbows

SpecDirectionNormalisationWeight (share)
Street PriceLower is better180–85020 (28.6%)
ConstructionHigher is betterhybrid-reflex-deflex=95, takedown-laminated=80, one-piece-laminated=65, selfbow=5016 (22.9%)
Bow LengthHigher is better58–70"10 (14.3%)
Lightest Draw OfferedLower is better20–45lb10 (14.3%)
Heaviest Draw OfferedHigher is better50–70lb8 (11.4%)
Mass WeightLower is better1–1.5lb6 (8.6%)
Grip Stylereference onlylocator=0, straight=0, pistol=0not scored

Data sourcing

Manufacturer-published specs, cross-checked against authorised retailers. That’s the input — 86 products across 11categories as of June 2026. Some figures are standardised marketing ratings (compound IBO speed is the classic case); we score those because they’re the only like-for-like number that exists, and we flag them wherever they appear. Each product’s data caveats sit right under its spec table. One thing we won’t do: pretend spec analysis is lab testing. Chronograph, decibel and group-testing data are on the roadmap — until that bench exists, the How We Test page says so plainly.

Changelog

  • v1.1.0 — June 11, 2026. Category expansion: added broadheads, arrow rests, bow sights, release aids, stabilizers, longbows and a dedicated budget compound bow category — now 11 categories, 86 products, 54 ranked lists and 294 head-to-head comparisons. Sub-$700 ready-to-hunt compounds are scored in their own category with tier-appropriate bounds rather than merged into the flagship compound scale — a $450 package bow and a $2,100 carbon flagship answer different questions, and one linear price band can’t score both honestly. All v1.0.0 weights and bounds are unchanged; existing CareScores are unaffected. New in the engine: specialist lists can declare hard eligibility filters (e.g. fixed-blade-only, crossbow-rated-only, under-$500) alongside their published weights.
  • v1.0.0 — June 9, 2026. Initial public release: 4 categories, 32 products, 23 ranked lists, 112 head-to-head comparisons. Spec weights and bounds as published at release.

Material changes to weights, bounds or formula will increment this version and be recorded here, so historical citations of a CareScore remain auditable.