What about before 2013?
Unfortunately the records for this no longer exist. There has been an adjustment made within the ratings for some characters whom were successful before 2013, but that will be discussed later. It should also be noted that there are some missing records for other months in the 2013-2024 period, and this will be seen in the ratings where some monthly updates have very few characters listed, or none at all.

Okay… but how does this actually work for XWF?
ELO starts with a base rating, that in this case has been assigned as 1600 points for every new character. Points are gained through winning matches. These are always taken from opponents. New points are only ever added to the system when new characters appear, bringing their 1600 points along with them.

A comparison of rating points between competitors then serves as a probability estimate for victory. This is a known potential flaw in adapting the system to efedding in general as it depends on a normal statistical distribution of ability and therefore outcomes, which may not mirror the reality here.

Winning a less probable match-up (i.e., defeating someone with a higher rating) results in taking more points from them than they would get for winning a match they are expected to win. E.g., a character with a rating of 1800 defeating a character with a rating of 1400 may only take 2 or 3 rating points for that victory. If the character with 1400 points wins, they might take 30 points instead!

Once the probability has been determined, an adjustment (called the K-factor) is made that increases or decreases the rating points able to be exchanged. In chess, this takes into account adjusting for lower ratings to potentially earn more points, and for newer players. Here, an adjustment is only being made for newer players (first 5 matches, then 6-10 matches). This is done to quickly get people to a closer estimation of their rating.

But… what about multi-man matches?
Fantastic question. Ratings are compared between ‘winners’ and ‘losers’. So, in a tag team match, the ratings of each team are averaged and points taken and given normally based on this (i.e., a team made up of individuals with ratings of 1500 and 1700 respectively are both assigned 1600 for the tag team match). In a triple threat, the winner has their rating compared against the average of all of the losers. No differentiation is made between who was pinned or not, however the winner must take their points from the loser which means if the winner gained 20 points, each loser would only lose 10 points. At all times, where there is an ambiguity in how to prioritise points, the winner is prioritised. This is especially relevant in handicap matches, where 1 person defeating 2 others will earn more points than 2 people defeating 1.

What about championships? I'm the Universal Champion, I should have more points!
Yes. This is another unique addition for XWF to adjusting the K-factor that results in more or less rating points being exchanged. The following are examples of what can result in K-factor adjustments:
The number of matches a character has had
Championship matches, including what kind of championship (World/Universal and equivalents are worth more)
Show type (PPV vs. TV vs. Shove-It)
Main events
Match type (e.g., Specialty matches such as Leap of Faith, Handicap, Elimination where every character or side needs to be defeated)
Number of ‘sides’ in a match (beating more people = more points)
Through a combination of these all occurring at once, it's possible for some particularly large points exchanges. This most commonly occurs in matches with exceptionally large numbers of competitors at PPVs, such as Battle Royals or Gauntlets. War Games has also proven to be a big game changer. These are flagged for review for any future ELO 2.0, but for now, it is an accepted potential flaw.

There is one other adjustment. Any character whom was either a former XWF Universal Champion, or inducted into the XWF Hall of Legends, before their first rated match is assigned a base 1800 points rather than 1600, to acknowledge their prior success. It is usually pretty visible when this happens but to help understand this, see the below real examples (these are not exhaustive of this adjustment's application):

• Centurion was inducted into the Hall of Legends before appearing. Assigned 1800 points on first appearance.
  
• Shawn Warstein was inducted into the Hall of Legends after first appearing on this rating list but the character was a former Universal Champion before appearing. Assigned 1800 points.
  
• James Raven was both a former Universal Champion and inducted into the Hall of Legends. Assigned 1800 points.
  

Meanwhile:

• Chris Page was inducted into the Hall of Legends AND won the Universal Championship after first appearing. Assigned 1600 points.
  
• ALIAS’s handler met the criteria, but not the character. Assigned 1600 points.
  

You mentioned flaws. Any others?
Yes, in a sense. Over time, there has been a drift towards higher and higher points. This isn't too bad, because it has also spread out lower too. But it's more likely that characters that experience success stick around, so those who would make up the lower end wind up leaving the rating system. This skews the average rating higher as the years go on. I have some ideas on how to control for this, but that would be for any potential ELO 2.0 that may or may not happen.

There are likely other flaws too, all related to the level of adjustment to the K-factor. Battle royals and gauntlets have stood out as big momentum shifters along the way. Happy to take feedback if people see any.

Wait… did you say “leave the rating system”?
I did. To qualify for appearing on a monthly list  you need to have met the activity prerequisite. This involves two components:

1. A minimum of 5 matches without being made inactive by criteria 2 is required to appear on a published list. If this is not met, a character remains on an unpublished ‘working list’ until criteria 2 is met.
   
2. If a character has 0 matches for 3 consecutive months, they are made inactive from both the published and ‘working’ list and ‘leave’ the system. Their data is retained for when they return.
   

It is therefore possible for a character to have 1 match every 2 months and then appear on the published list after 10 months have passed. It is also possible for somebody to have quit the fed in a blazing fury, but still appear on the published list for 2 more months.

As an illustration, if there are 30 characters on the published list, at times there may be 60-100 on the ‘working list’!

Anything else to know?
Remember that these are relative ratings. A character with 2000 rating points in 2014 cannot be easily compared to a character with 2000 rating points in 2024. Their competition is different. This is doubly true for the ranking itself (i.e., first place, second place, etc.). Still, when the ratings are all published to the site, I will put together some stats based on these just for fun.

The ratings are also a constant quest for a ‘true’ value. If your character has a low rating, it's been observed that with some good results it doesn't take long to rack up 200 rating points and change your relative rating. Pro tip: Win title matches, win PPV matches, win large multi-man matches.

These aren't official either. They don't have any bearing on your likelihood of earning title shots, and I absolutely love seeing big changes in this so please prove the ratings wrong. For now, I don't even know if they're canon. XWF management can make that call, but I would advise thinking of them as independent, more akin to the PWI Top 500.