A transparent framework for comparing Thai property developers on delivery history, build-quality signals, after-sales service and portfolio transparency. The method is written down. The number is not yet computed.
Status, upfront: this page defines the Developer Score methodology. It is not yet computed and published per developer. The live pages today are the developer directory and developers ranked by portfolio — catalogs, not this score. This score is on the roadmap. When it is computed it will use the developer registry being built.
| Sub-factor | Points | How it would be measured |
|---|---|---|
| Delivery history | 0-25 | Completed projects the developer has actually handed over, and whether those handovers match the published timeline. A first project with no handover yet cannot earn points here. |
| Build quality signals | 0-25 | What can be observed on delivered buildings: visible condition, common-area upkeep, and recurring defects reported by residents or juristic offices — not a brochure claim. |
| After-sales service | 0-25 | How the developer handles defects, common-area issues and juristic-office support after handover. No after-sales record means this sub-factor stays empty. |
| Portfolio transparency | 0-25 | Whether the developer publishes a current project list, company identity and contact path that can be checked against the developer registry. |
Developer Score = Delivery History (0–25) + Build Quality Signals (0–25) + After-sales Service (0–25) + Portfolio Transparency (0–25), for a maximum of 100. A missing sub-factor stays empty. An empty sub-factor means there is no total — we do not fill a gap with zero and call it a score.
This is a disclosed proprietary methodology for general research purposes only — not investment, legal or financial advice. A developer listing on BAANLYY is not a Developer Score.