Where the lab earns its keep
The lab's headline number is the 90-day captain hit rate — the share of captain picks that finish inside the top-25% of fantasy points in their respective contests.
PlayExch
90-day captain hit rate: 61%. Differential captain hit rate: 47%. Methodology: published. Dataset: timestamped and locked. Re-test cadence: weekly.
Dream11
Captain hit rate: not published. Methodology: not disclosed. Re-test cadence: not available. The lab's research team publishes weekly comparisons against Dream11's consensus picks.
MPL
Captain hit rate: not published. Methodology: not disclosed. Re-test cadence: not available. The lab covers MPL's contest variety and payout speed in the weekly contest-strategy post.
My11Circle
Captain hit rate: not published. Methodology: not disclosed. Re-test cadence: not available. The lab covers My11Circle's private-league features in the weekly contest-strategy post.
How fast winnings land
The lab's payout speed is fifteen minutes for UPI, four hours for IMPS, twenty-four hours for NEFT, same-day for RTGS.
The lab's editorial edge
The lab publishes twelve reports per week. The lab's editorial coverage is the broadest in the fantasy cricket space — no other publication matches the cadence or the methodology transparency.
PlayExch
12 reports per week. Methodology published. Dataset timestamped. Re-test cadence: weekly. Editorial principles: 5 public commitments. Sponsorship: none.
Dream11
No editorial coverage. Captain picks come from in-app tips, which are sponsored. Methodology not disclosed.
MPL
Limited editorial coverage via the in-app news feed. Captain picks come from in-app tips. Methodology not disclosed.
My11Circle
No editorial coverage. Captain picks come from in-app tips. Methodology not disclosed.
Comparisons questions, answered
The most common questions about comparisons on PlayExch, with detailed answers.
Which platform has the best captain hit rate?
PlayExch publishes a 90-day rolling captain hit rate of 61%. No other platform publishes hit-rate data. The lab's data is publicly auditable — the methodology page publishes the model code.
Which platform pays out fastest?
PlayExch partner operators and Dream11 both offer 15-minute UPI withdrawals during business hours. MPL and My11Circle are slower. The lab's published payout timelines are verified quarterly.
Which platform has the best editorial coverage?
PlayExch publishes 12 reports per week. No other platform matches the cadence or the methodology transparency. The lab's editorial principles are published on the owner page.
Can I use multiple platforms?
Yes. The lab's picks are platform-agnostic — the captain matrix and contest strategy work on any major Indian contest platform. The lab partners with four operators and earns a referral commission on entries.
Is the lab's content free?
Yes. The lab's editorial content (lab reports, captain matrix, methodology) is freely accessible without signup. The lab's revenue comes from reader subscriptions and contest-entry referrals, not from paywalled analysis.
See the decision from three angles
These visuals connect the page topic to the evidence, decision and safety checks readers should make before acting.
Ready to start with PlayExch?
Read the lab reports, pick a contest tier, run ten squads with the captain reads, and audit your ROI after fifty contests.
The lab's deeper perspective on comparisons
Beyond the headline content, the lab's editorial team publishes a longer read on the underlying dynamics, the historical context, and the future direction.
Historical context
The fantasy cricket market has evolved through three phases. Phase 1 (2008-2015) was the early-adopter phase — Dream11 was the dominant operator and the captain-pick methodology was largely gut-driven. Phase 2 (2016-2022) was the data-driven phase — operators introduced live-match data feeds and projection models became more sophisticated. Phase 3 (2023-present) is the transparency phase — readers demand methodology disclosure, hit-rate auditing, and assumption-risk documentation. The lab was founded in 2023 to serve Phase 3 readers.
Underlying dynamics
The underlying dynamics of fantasy cricket are driven by three forces. The first is the ownership distribution — when ownership spikes, the differential edge compresses. The second is the venue read — venue-aware picks outperform venue-blind picks by 11 points in hit rate. The third is the form curve — recent form is a stronger predictor than career average. The lab's research covers all three forces in depth.
Future direction
The fantasy cricket market is moving toward three futures. The first is increased regulation — state gaming authorities are tightening the rules around paid contests. The second is increased transparency — readers demand methodology disclosure and hit-rate auditing. The third is increased automation — AI-driven captain picks and squad optimization are becoming mainstream. The lab is positioned for all three futures.
Lab's editorial position
The lab's editorial position is that fantasy cricket is a research-grade problem. Captain picks are not gut calls — they are data-driven decisions backed by methodology, dataset versioning, and assumption-risk documentation. The lab's editorial principles are published on the owner page. The lab's editorial standards are reviewed quarterly by the editorial board.
The lab's extended perspective
A longer-form walk-through of the underlying dynamics, the data behind the recommendations, and the lab's analytical approach.
Methodology in depth
The lab's methodology is built on a five-stage pipeline. Every published report passes through framing, dataset pull, analysis, assumption-risk documentation, and re-test. The pipeline is published in full on the methodology page. The lab's edge comes from data freshness and analyst expertise, not from a secret formula. Other analysts can re-run the experiments with the published datasets and the published model code. The lab publishes every dataset version and every model version. The lab never quietly updates a dataset after the conclusion lands.
Data sources in depth
The lab pulls data from four primary sources. Match data comes from official tournament data partners, cross-checked against broadcast records. Ownership data comes from public contest-platform feeds, sampled every 30 seconds during contest open windows. Contest result archives come from publicly published leaderboards. Self-collected squad logs come from volunteer readers who submit their picks at lock time. Each source has a published quality score and a published latency benchmark. The lab's data-quality framework is reviewed quarterly by the statistics team.
Reader-safety commitments
The lab's reader-safety commitments cover deposit limits, self-exclusion, play-time alerts, loss trackers, cool-down reminders, and family-controls integration. The lab publishes the safety commitments on the responsible-play page. The lab refuses to partner with operators that do not enforce responsible-play defaults. The lab's reader-safety framework is reviewed annually by an external auditor.
Editorial principles
The lab operates by five public editorial principles. No sponsored picks — no contest operator, brand, or individual can pay the lab to feature a captain pick. Methodology is public — every model's code is published on the methodology page. Misses are published — every Monday morning the lab publishes the previous week's misses alongside the hits. Reader-funded economics — the lab's long-term economics rely on reader subscriptions and contest-entry referrals, not on advertising. Responsible play by default — every contest lobby on the lab's partner platforms shows a responsible-play banner.
Quarterly transparency
Every quarter the lab publishes a transparency report covering methodology changes, hit-rate recalibrations, partner-operator relationships, and revenue mix. The report is published on the 15th of the month following quarter end. The most recent report covers Q1 2026 and shows a 61% captain hit rate over the trailing 90 days, a 48/47/5 revenue split between subscriptions, referrals, and other, and four partner operators. The report is available on the disclosure page.