Best Residential Proxies: A Procurement Evaluation Framework and Reliability Acceptance Checklist

If you're seeing vendor-claimed 99.95% success rates but your production jobs hit 98% or lower, the root cause is usually the gap between marketing benchmarks and real-world conditions. Most teams waste time cycling through residential proxy providers based on listicle rankings, but the safer approach is building an acceptance framework that converts vendor promises into testable pass/fail criteria before you buy residential proxies. Below is a procurement evaluation framework tailored to enterprise teams who need defensible vendor selection and measurable reliability thresholds.

direct_answer_block

The best residential proxy providers are the ones that pass YOUR acceptance tests—not the ones that top generic rankings. Independent research reveals consistent gaps between vendor claims and measured performance: for example, one major provider claims 99.95% success rates while independent testing measured 98.96% success with 1.21s response times versus the claimed ~0.7s. This isn't vendor deception—it's the reality that residential proxy network performance varies dramatically by target site protection level, geographic routing, and time of day.

Your procurement decision should be based on three verifiable criteria:

1. Ethical sourcing verification: Does the provider score 7/7 on the ethical IP sourcing checklist? Failure on any single point—proxy sourcing transparency, peer consent, opt-out ability, GDPR/CCPA compliance, user benefit, idle device only, SDK termination on uninstall—puts your data collection at serious risk.

2. Performance against YOUR targets: Residential proxies achieve 83-94% success rates against lightly-protected websites but drop to 21-37% against all URLs combined and approach 0% against heavily-protected sites. Your acceptance threshold must match your actual target protection level.

3. Measurable reliability over time windows: Results should be validated across 24-hour, 7-day, and 30-day periods to distinguish immediate performance from long-term reliability. Proxy testing must be ongoing, not one-time—IP reputation changes quickly, and what works today may be blocked tomorrow.

The cheapest residential proxy is not the one with the lowest per-GB rate; it's the one that achieves your required success rate without retry overhead eating your budget.

risk_boundary_box

Before evaluating any residential proxy service, establish clear boundaries around what disqualifies a provider from consideration. These are not negotiable trade-offs—they are procurement red lines.

Unethical IP Sourcing (Immediate Disqualification)

Residential proxy pools are created through four primary mechanisms: embedded SDKs in applications, peer-to-peer proxy clients with compensation, compromised devices/botnets, and ISP/static residential allocations. Only the first two are acceptable when properly implemented with explicit consent.

Red flags requiring immediate disqualification:

• No documented consent mechanism for residential IP contributors

• Inability to demonstrate that proxy residential IPs come from users who explicitly opted in

• Missing compensation model for bandwidth contributors

• SDK that doesn't terminate proxy participation when the host application is uninstalled

• Devices used as proxies while not charging, not on WiFi, or without user opt-in

The boundary statement is unambiguous: providers failing any item in the 7-point ethical sourcing checklist should not be used. This checklist covers proxy sourcing transparency, peer consent, opt-out ability, GDPR/CCPA compliance, user benefit, idle device only operation, and SDK termination on app uninstall. Only providers scoring 7/7 should be considered, as failure to comply with even one criterion could put your data collection at serious risk.

Compliance Certification Gaps

Verify ISO 27001 certification by confirming the certificate number or public reference to an accredited audit—not just the claim. Some providers hold ISO 27001, SOC 2, SOC 3, and CSA STAR Level 1 certifications with explicit ethical sourcing statements, while others hold ISO/IEC 27001:2022 certification. Request the specific certificate documentation during procurement.

Compliance verification steps:

• Read the Privacy Policy and DPA sections covering proxies and GDPR

• Verify how the provider treats IPs, logs, and data subject rights

• Confirm KYC process exists (automatic internal check, Know Your Customer process, automated anti-fraud third-party tool verification)

• Check for EWDCI membership which indicates ethical and sustainable proxy sourcing commitment

Detection Risk Signals

Short-lived sessions, inconsistent user-agent fingerprints, or rapid city/ISP hopping strongly indicate automated residential proxy use and trigger the strongest detection approaches, which combine third-party IP intelligence, user behavior analysis, device fingerprinting, and historical patterns.

Operational boundaries to prevent detection:

• Optimal sticky session duration is 10-30 minutes; longer sessions increase detection risk while sessions up to 24 hours are available but longer sessions increase IP rotation risk due to residential devices going offline

• Avoid patterns that create detection signals even when using legitimate residential proxies

• Monitor for CAPTCHA increase, which signals the website is flagging traffic as bot activity

Verification Failures

Some providers label datacenter IPs as residential or ISP-grade. A legitimate residential proxy server should be registered under a consumer broadband provider's ASN, not a hosting company. Test ASN legitimacy by confirming that databases recognize IPs as residential, measure subnet diversity across /24 blocks, and validate real-world performance against protected targets.

troubleshooting_matrix

This matrix is for defensive diagnostics and compliance-safe validation only. It helps you distinguish provider-side reliability issues from target-side policy/rate limits without providing bypass tactics.

Escalation protocol: When an issue persists, provide the provider: (1) timestamps, (2) target category (not confidential URLs if constrained), (3) request volume/cadence, (4) failure samples, (5) your acceptance thresholds, and (6) steps to reproduce in a compliance-safe environment.

decision_matrix_table

This evaluation framework uses seven weighted dimensions derived from industry methodology. Adjust weights based on your specific workload requirements—the weights shown represent balanced general-purpose evaluation.

Scoring Guidelines

Score 5: Exceeds requirements with documented evidence. Independent verification confirms vendor claims. All compliance artifacts available on request.

Score 4: Meets requirements. Minor gaps between claimed and measured performance within acceptable tolerance (e.g., 98.96% measured vs. 99.95% claimed is common).

Score 3: Acceptable with caveats. Some requirements met but verification incomplete. Proceed with enhanced monitoring.

Score 2: Below requirements. Significant gaps identified. Requires remediation commitment from vendor before proceeding.

Score 1: Fails requirements. Missing critical capabilities or compliance documentation. Disqualify from consideration.

Weighted Score Calculation

Multiply each dimension score by its weight, sum the results, then divide by 5 to get a normalized score (0-100%). Establish your minimum threshold before evaluation—typical enterprise threshold is 70%.

If you need residential proxies with verified compliance and flexible session control, evaluate providers against this matrix during your trial period.

Detailed Dimension Breakdown

Reliability Metric Definitions

Procurement success depends on agreeing with your vendor on exactly how metrics are calculated. Vague "success rate" claims are meaningless without counting rules.

Time to First Byte (TTFB): The interval between request initiation and first byte arrival. Components include DNS resolution, TCP connection, TLS handshake, proxy overhead, and target response start. The good threshold is 0.8 seconds or less. This is the primary latency metric for residential proxy server evaluation.

Success Rate: Percentage of requests receiving valid responses. Critical caveat: results with unrealistically small file sizes indicate unsuccessful results. The 20% threshold rule applies—if the result with the smallest file size is 20%+ smaller than the next larger result, classify it as a failed request.

Average Time to Successful Response (ATSR): Mean response time calculated only for successful requests. This measures steady-state performance.

Standard Deviation of Successful Response Time (SDSRT): Variability metric indicating consistency. High SDSRT signals unpredictable performance that will affect downstream systems.

All metrics should be measured across three time periods: 24 hours (current performance), 7 days (short-term reliability), and 30 days (long-term stability). This multi-period approach distinguishes immediate performance from sustainable reliability.

Observability Requirements

During procurement, verify the provider offers:

• Real-time usage dashboard with bandwidth consumption tracking

• Historical request/response logging for debugging

• Geographic distribution visualization

• Session health monitoring for sticky sessions

• Pool telemetry showing historical availability, success rates, and error codes

For production deployments, establish baseline metrics for response time, error rate, and data completeness to detect anomalies over time. The best residential proxy providers offer API access to these metrics for integration with your monitoring stack.

Compliance Operationalization

Converting compliance claims into verifiable artifacts:

ISO 27001 verification: Request certificate number or public reference to accredited audit. Certificate should be current (audit within past year). Note specific standard version (e.g., ISO/IEC 27001:2022).

GDPR/CCPA compliance: Review Privacy Policy sections specifically addressing proxy IP handling. Verify data subject rights processes are documented. Confirm data processing agreements (DPA) are available.

Ethical sourcing verification: Require documentation of consent mechanism. For SDK-based sourcing, verify explicit consent screen implementation, opt-out ability without complicated procedures, and SDK termination on host app uninstall. Confirm user compensation model exists.

KYC process verification: Legitimate providers implement automatic internal checks, Know Your Customer processes, and automated anti-fraud third-party tool verification for their customers.

Exit and Portability Considerations

Before committing to buy rotating residential proxies from any provider, document:

• Data export capabilities (usage logs, configuration exports)

• Contract termination terms and notice periods

• Migration path complexity (credential format compatibility with alternatives)

• Minimum commitment periods and early termination penalties

measurement_plan_template

This acceptance test plan provides a reproducible benchmark protocol for validating residential proxy provider claims before procurement commitment.

Pre-Test Setup Checklist

Complete these items before executing any benchmark tests:

• [ ] Verify proxy credentials are valid (authentication test against provider endpoint)

• [ ] Confirm test targets are accessible directly (without proxy) to establish baseline

• [ ] Document baseline latency to test targets from your infrastructure

• [ ] Verify geographic location detection method (select IP geolocation API)

• [ ] Set up logging for all requests with timestamp, response code, response time, returned IP

• [ ] Confirm ethical/legal compliance with provider Terms of Service for testing

• [ ] Prepare results recording system with the specified CSV schema

Metric Definitions

# TTFB Calculation
Proxy TTFB = DNS + TCP_connect + TLS_handshake + Proxy_overhead + Target_response_start
Good threshold: ≤ 800ms (0.8 seconds)

# Success Rate Calculation  
Success Rate = (Successful_Requests / Total_Requests) × 100
Note: Exclude results with file size 20%+ smaller than median (partial/error responses)

# Expected Ranges (residential proxies)
Response time: 200-2000ms (vs. 10-100ms for datacenter)
Success rate vs. lightly-protected sites: 83-94%
Success rate vs. all URLs: 21-37%
Success rate vs. heavily-protected sites: ~0%

Test Execution Order

Execute tests in this sequence for each provider under evaluation:

Phase 1: Connectivity (15 minutes)

1. HTTP endpoint connectivity test (10 requests)

2. HTTPS endpoint connectivity test (10 requests)

3. SOCKS5 connectivity test if supported (10 requests)

Phase 2: Geographic Accuracy (30 minutes)4. Request geo-target (country level), verify via geolocation API 5. Request geo-target (state/city level if backconnect entry available), verify 6. Document any mismatches between requested and returned location

Phase 3: Latency Measurement (60 minutes)7. Sequential latency test: N=100 requests, 1 concurrency, measure TTFB and total time 8. Concurrent latency test: N=100 requests at concurrency levels 5, 10, 20 9. Calculate ATSR and SDSRT for each concurrency level

Phase 4: Session Behavior (45 minutes)10. Sticky session persistence test: Request 10-minute session, verify IP consistency 11. Rotation test: Confirm IP changes between requests in rotating mode 12. Session duration test: Track actual duration vs. configured duration

Phase 5: Stress Test (Optional, 30 minutes)13. High concurrency burst: 50-100 concurrent requests 14. Measure degradation patterns under load

Safe Test Endpoints

Use only endpoints you own, operate, or have explicit permission to test against. The goal is to validate proxy behavior (egress IP, geo signal, error handling, stability) without violating third-party Terms.

Recommended safe approach:

• A controlled endpoint you operate (preferred)

• A permitted test environment provided by the proxy vendor (if available)

• A minimal "IP echo" endpoint only if it is explicitly permitted by the endpoint operator

Validation checklist for the endpoint:

• Returns caller IP/geo metadata (or logs it server-side)

• Can be rate-limited intentionally for testing 429 behavior

• Can simulate 403/deny rules for negative testing

• Produces request IDs/timestamps for reproducibility

Results Recording Schema

timestamp,provider,endpoint,geo_target,session_type,concurrency,request_id,response_code,ttfb_ms,total_time_ms,returned_ip,returned_country,returned_city,error_type

Python Benchmark Skeleton

#!/usr/bin/env python3
"""
Residential Proxy Benchmark Tool
For educational/testing purposes only.
Only test against endpoints you have permission to access.
"""

import asyncio
import aiohttp
import time
from dataclasses import dataclass
from typing import Optional

@dataclass
class ProxyConfig:
    name: str
    host: str
    port: int
    username: str
    password: str

@dataclass  
class TestConfig:
    target_url: str = "https://httpbin.org/ip"
    num_requests: int = 100
    timeout_seconds: int = 30
    concurrency: int = 1
    session_type: str = "rotating"

async def measure_request(session, proxy_config, test_config, request_id):
    proxy_url = f"http://{proxy_config.username}:{proxy_config.password}@{proxy_config.host}:{proxy_config.port}"
    start_time = time.perf_counter()

    try:
        async with session.get(
            test_config.target_url,
            proxy=proxy_url,
            timeout=aiohttp.ClientTimeout(total=test_config.timeout_seconds)
        ) as response:
            ttfb = (time.perf_counter() - start_time) * 1000
            body = await response.text()
            total_time = (time.perf_counter() - start_time) * 1000
            return {"ttfb_ms": ttfb, "total_ms": total_time, "status": response.status}
    except Exception as e:
        return {"error": str(e)}

# Full implementation requires: connection pooling, retry logic, results aggregation

Pass/Fail Thresholds

Set your thresholds based on your actual requirements. Example thresholds for general-purpose evaluation:

Validation Notes

• Run tests from infrastructure similar to production (cloud region, network conditions)

• Execute during both peak and off-peak hours to capture variability

• Repeat measurements over 3+ days before final decision

• Compare measured results against vendor-claimed specifications

• Document all deviations for negotiation or disqualification

procurement_due_diligence_checklist

This checklist operationalizes compliance and ethical sourcing verification during the procurement process. Complete all sections before signing any contract for residential proxy services.

Section 1: Ethical IP Sourcing Verification

7-Point Ethical Sourcing Checklist (All items required for 7/7 score):

• [ ] Proxy Sourcing Transparency: Provider documents how residential IPs are acquired. Acceptable methods: embedded SDKs in apps with consent, peer-to-peer proxy clients with compensation. Unacceptable: compromised devices, botnets, non-consented SDK embedding.

• [ ] Peer Consent: Users explicitly opt-in via consent screen with clear participation statement. Verify that SDK partner requirements include trusted user base, clear native UI with settings menu for opt-out, and non-PUA (Potentially Unwanted Application) status.

• [ ] Opt-Out Ability: Users can withdraw consent without complicated procedures. Opt-out mechanism must be documented and accessible.

• [ ] GDPR/CCPA Compliance: Provider demonstrates compliance through documented data processing agreements, privacy policy coverage of proxy operations, and data subject rights processes.

• [ ] User Benefit: Bandwidth contributors receive compensation (monetary rewards via apps like peer-to-peer income programs) or equivalent value exchange (premium features in exchange for proxy participation).

• [ ] Idle Device Only: Devices are only used as proxies when charging, have sufficient battery, and connected to WiFi. This ensures contributor devices aren't degraded.

• [ ] SDK Termination: Proxy participation terminates when host application is uninstalled. Verify this behavior is documented.

Scoring: Failure on any single point means the provider fails the ethical sourcing requirement entirely. Only providers scoring 7/7 should be used.

Section 2: Compliance Certifications

Request and verify the following documentation:

• [ ] ISO 27001 Certificate: Confirm certificate number or public reference to accredited audit. Verify certification is current (within past year). Note specific standard version (e.g., ISO/IEC 27001:2022).

• [ ] SOC 2 Report: Type II preferred (covers operating effectiveness over time). Request executive summary or full report under NDA.

• [ ] SOC 3 Report: Public report version if SOC 2 is unavailable.

• [ ] Third-Party Assurance Artifacts (if applicable): Request any independent assurance materials that the provider can legally share under NDA (e.g., audit summaries, security controls attestations, or equivalent). If none are available, record as a procurement risk and define compensating controls in your acceptance plan.

Section 3: Acceptable Use Policy Review

Analyze the provider's AUP for:

• [ ] Prohibited use cases are clearly defined (ensures provider enforces a list of forbidden scenarios)

• [ ] Traffic pattern monitoring is documented (provider monitors for abuse)

• [ ] Transparent supply chain disclosure (you understand where IPs originate)

• [ ] Customer KYC process exists (automatic internal check, Know Your Customer process, automated anti-fraud third-party tool verification)

Section 4: IP Pool Integrity Verification

Request evidence of:

• [ ] IP pool monitoring for quality (only fresh, low-threat residential IPs included while non-compliant IPs removed)

• [ ] ASN legitimacy verification (IPs registered under consumer broadband provider ASNs, not hosting companies)

• [ ] Subnet diversity metrics (/24 block distribution)

• [ ] Pool refresh rates and methodology

Red flag: Vendor-claimed pool sizes (e.g., 7 million to 72 million in weeks) may not reflect actual usable daily diversity. Request methodology behind pool size claims.

Section 5: Contract Red Flags

Reject or negotiate contracts containing:

• [ ] No documentation of IP sourcing methodology

• [ ] Missing or vague privacy policy coverage of proxy operations

• [ ] No data processing agreement available

• [ ] Refusal to provide certification documentation

• [ ] Excessive minimum commitment without trial period (look for residential proxy free trial availability)

• [ ] No SLA or status page commitment

• [ ] Vague support escalation path

Procurement Decision Matrix

Decision rule: Any "Fail" in Ethical Sourcing or ISO 27001 is disqualifying. Two or more "Fail" results in other areas require remediation commitment before proceeding.

For organizations seeking static residential proxies for persistent identity requirements, this due diligence is particularly critical as longer session associations increase compliance exposure.

integration_snippet_placeholder

If RAG contains verbatim integration code/config, quote it exactly (Tier1). Otherwise, provide a Tier2 safe template using only YOUR_* placeholders and include validation steps.

# Standard example (not verbatim)
# Purpose: create a minimal, auditable proxy configuration wrapper for POC testing.
# Notes:
# - Do not add evasion/bypass logic.
# - Focus on observability, error typing, and reproducible measurement.

from dataclasses import dataclass
import time
import requests

@dataclass
class ProxyConfig:
    name: str
    host: str
    port: int
    username: str
    password: str
    scheme: str = "http"   # or "socks5" if supported by provider

def build_proxy_url(cfg: ProxyConfig) -> str:
    return f"{cfg.scheme}://{cfg.username}:{cfg.password}@{cfg.host}:{cfg.port}"

def request_with_observability(cfg: ProxyConfig, url: str, timeout_s: float = 15.0) -> dict:
    proxies = {"http": build_proxy_url(cfg), "https": build_proxy_url(cfg)}
    start = time.time()
    try:
        r = requests.get(url, proxies=proxies, timeout=timeout_s)
        elapsed_ms = int((time.time() - start) * 1000)
        return {
            "provider": cfg.name,
            "status_code": r.status_code,
            "elapsed_ms": elapsed_ms,
            "error_type": None,
            "body_validation_pass": (r.status_code == 200 and len(r.text) > 0),
        }
    except requests.Timeout:
        return {"provider": cfg.name, "status_code": None, "elapsed_ms": None, "error_type": "timeout", "body_validation_pass": False}
    except Exception as e:
        return {"provider": cfg.name, "status_code": None, "elapsed_ms": None, "error_type": "exception", "body_validation_pass": False}

# Validation Steps:
# 1) Run against a permitted test endpoint (prefer one you control) with low concurrency.
# 2) Record status_code, elapsed_ms, and body_validation_pass (do not rely on status_code only).
# 3) Repeat across time windows; compute success rate by counting rules defined in measurement_plan_template.
# 4) If failures cluster, capture timestamps + error_type and escalate with reproducible inputs.

For teams requiring high geographic diversity with unlimited residential proxies, ensure your integration supports dynamic geo-targeting parameters.

Use Case Stratification and Performance Expectations

Different workloads require different evaluation criteria. The best residential proxy for your use case depends on matching provider capabilities to your specific requirements.

High-Diversity Data Collection

Requirements: Maximum IP rotation, geographic spread, high request volumeRecommended session type: Rotating (new IP each request)Key metrics: Unique IPs per hour, C-class subnet diversity, cost per successful requestExpected success rates: 21-37% against all URLs, 83-94% against lightly-protected targets

When you buy residential proxy access for large-scale collection, prioritize pool diversity over individual IP quality. Verify the provider's claimed pool size against actual daily unique IP delivery using the C-class subnetwork mask methodology over 400K+ connection requests.

Logged-In Session Workflows

Requirements: Session persistence, identity consistency, multi-step flowsRecommended session type: Sticky (10-30 minute sessions optimal)Key metrics: Session persistence rate, session duration accuracy, geographic consistencyCaveats: Sessions up to 24 hours available but longer sessions increase IP rotation risk due to residential devices going offline

Static residential (ISP) proxies provide persistent home-IP identity for hours or days—ideal for logged-in flows, QA, and account management. Consider these when session persistence is critical.

Geographic-Specific Testing

Requirements: Accurate geo-targeting, ASN/ISP-specific routing, content verificationRecommended configuration: Backconnect entry with state/city targeting, ASN filtering if availableKey metrics: Geo accuracy rate, ASN match rate, content consistencyCaveat: Geo-only targeting often misses network identity impact. Content can change by ISP/carrier/ASN, causing false negatives in QA and inconsistent results.

Provider evaluation criteria for ASN targeting: ASN/ISP filter support by proxy type, session control (TTL, reuse, termination hooks), and pool telemetry (historical availability, success rates, error codes).

Protection-Level Considerations

Independent benchmarks reveal dramatic success rate differences by target protection level:

Set your acceptance thresholds based on your actual target mix. The cheapest residential proxy that meets requirements for lightly-protected targets may be completely inadequate for protected targets.

For global coverage requirements, verify provider locations match your target geographic distribution.

Vendor Claim Verification

A credibility checklist for evaluating residential proxy provider claims before procurement.

Success Rate Claims

Common claim pattern: "99.95% success rate"Independent verification: ProxyWay 2024 research measured one major provider at 98.96% success rate—a gap of nearly 1% from claimed 99.95%. This isn't fraud; it's the difference between controlled benchmark conditions and real-world variability.

Verification approach: Run your own acceptance tests against your actual targets. Measure over 3+ days. Compare against protection-level expectations (83-94% for lightly-protected, 21-37% for all URLs).

Response Time Claims

Common claim pattern: "~0.7s average response time"Independent verification: Same provider measured at 1.21s response time in independent testing—nearly double the claimed figure.

Verification approach: Your measured TTFB is the only metric that matters. Expected range for residential proxies is 200-2000ms. Anything under 800ms is good; over 1500ms requires investigation.

Pool Size Claims

Common claim pattern: "100M+ residential IPs"Reality check: Vendor-claimed pool sizes ranging from 500,000 to 7 million in a week, or 23 million to 62 million in a month, may not reflect actual usable daily diversity.

Verification approach: Measure unique IPs delivered over 3+ days. Calculate C-class subnet diversity. The actual daily unique delivery matters more than total claimed pool size.

Compliance Claims

Common claim pattern: "Fully GDPR compliant"Verification approach: Request specific documentation:

• Privacy Policy sections covering proxy IP handling

• Data Processing Agreement (DPA)

• Evidence of data subject rights processes

• For ISO 27001 claims: certificate number or accredited audit reference

Proxy residential services marketed as "the best" often lack verifiable compliance documentation. Make this a hard requirement, not a nice-to-have.

final_checklist

Complete this acceptance checklist before signing any residential proxy provider contract. Each section must pass for procurement approval.

Pre-Test Setup Verification

• [ ] Proxy credentials validated (authentication test passed)

• [ ] Test targets accessible directly (baseline established)

• [ ] Baseline latency documented

• [ ] IP geolocation verification method selected and tested

• [ ] Logging system operational

• [ ] Provider ToS reviewed for testing compliance

Performance Acceptance Criteria

• [ ] Success rate meets threshold for your target protection level

• Lightly-protected targets: ≥ 85%

• Mixed targets: ≥ 30%

• Document your specific threshold: _______

• [ ] TTFB P50 ≤ 800ms

• [ ] TTFB P95 ≤ 2000ms (within 200-2000ms residential range)

• [ ] ATSR variability acceptable (document SDSRT threshold)

• [ ] Geographic accuracy ≥ 95% for requested targets

• [ ] Sticky session persistence ≥ 90% of configured duration

Ethical Sourcing Verification

• [ ] 7-point ethical checklist: 7/7 (mandatory)

• [ ] Proxy sourcing transparency

• [ ] Peer consent mechanism

• [ ] Opt-out ability

• [ ] GDPR/CCPA compliance

• [ ] User benefit/compensation

• [ ] Idle device only

• [ ] SDK termination on uninstall

Compliance Documentation

• [ ] ISO 27001 certificate number verified

• [ ] Privacy Policy reviewed (proxy-specific sections)

• [ ] Data Processing Agreement available

• [ ] KYC process documented

• [ ] AUP review completed (no red flags)

Operational Readiness

• [ ] Support escalation path documented

• [ ] Status page URL confirmed

• [ ] Integration documentation available for required languages

• [ ] Session control parameters understood

• [ ] Protocol requirements confirmed (SOCKS5 session parameter caveat if applicable)

Contract Terms

• [ ] Trial period or residential proxy free trial utilized before commitment

• [ ] Minimum commitment period acceptable

• [ ] SLA terms documented

• [ ] Exit/portability terms reviewed

• [ ] Pricing model understood (per-GB, bandwidth tiers)

Decision Matrix Score

• [ ] Weighted evaluation score calculated: _______/100%

• [ ] Score meets minimum threshold (typical: ≥70%)

• [ ] No disqualifying failures in Ethical Sourcing or Compliance

Final Approval

• [ ] All mandatory sections pass

• [ ] Deviations documented and accepted

• [ ] Procurement approved: YES / NO

Ongoing requirement: Proxy testing must be ongoing, not one-time. IP reputation changes quickly, and what works today may be blocked tomorrow. Schedule monthly re-validation against acceptance criteria.

The best residential proxy providers are those that pass your specific acceptance tests—not generic industry rankings. Use this framework to make defensible procurement decisions based on measurable evidence.