pdsmmpanel.com vs simplefollows.com
Two SMM panels side by side, on the figures we measure — age from the registries, the public price list, the order counter, reviews on named platforms — not on what either says about itself. Updated September 22, 2026.
| 2 panels |
39/ 100 · Guarded
|
40/ 100 · Guarded
|
|---|---|---|
| Online since | 2023 | 2022 |
| Engine | Perfect Panel | Perfect Panel |
| Services listed | 2,143 | 870 |
| Lowest price | $0.0007 per 1,000 | $0.0008 per 1,000 |
| Order counter | not shown | 236,448 orders |
| Growth, 30 days | — | about 37 a day (+183 over 5 days) |
| User rating | no reviews read | no reviews read |
| Review platforms | — | — |
| Owner | unclaimed | unclaimed |
| Reseller API | yes · /api/v2 | yes · /api/v2 |
| Status | online | online |
Prices on shared services
The lowest public rate per 1,000 on services at least two of these panels sell. Cheapest is not always fastest — refill and drop stand on each listing.
Cheapest across 12 rows: pdsmmpanel.com 10 · simplefollows.com 2
| Service |  pdsmmpanel.com |  simplefollows.com |
|---|---|---|
| Instagram followers | $0.186 | $0.278 |
| Instagram likes | $0.024 | $0.038 |
| Instagram views | $0.0007 | $0.0011 |
| Instagram shares | $0.012 | $0.0008 |
| TikTok followers | $0.24 | $1.26 |
| TikTok likes | $0.035 | $0.082 |
| TikTok views | $0.002 | $0.006 |
| TikTok comments | $2.50 | $4.36 |
| TikTok shares | $0.012 | $0.013 |
| YouTube likes | $0.39 | $0.716 |
| YouTube views | $0.14 | $0.279 |
| YouTube subscribers | $0.03 | $0.015 |
| Telegram likes | $0.019 | $0.039 |
| Telegram views | $0.0015 | $0.0033 |
| Telegram members | $0.153 | $0.303 |
| Facebook followers | $0.087 | $0.148 |
| Facebook likes | $0.071 | $0.124 |
| Facebook views | $0.018 | $0.026 |
| Facebook members | $0.184 | $0.297 |
| Twitter / X followers | $2.08 | $1.14 |
| Twitter / X likes | $0.80 | $0.919 |
| Twitter / X views | $0.001 | $0.0015 |
| WhatsApp members | $0.196 | $0.325 |
Other comparisons
The nearest panels on the Trust Score to each side, online today.
pdsmmpanel.com against…
pdsmmpanel.com vs simplefollows.com: questions and answers
Straight answers about pdsmmpanel.com vs simplefollows.com, built from what we measured — the counter, the price list, the registries and the review platforms. Facts last read September 22, 2026.
simplefollows.com scores 40 of 100 on the Trust Score, pdsmmpanel.com 39 — a 1-point gap. simplefollows.com is the older of the two, online since 2022; pdsmmpanel.com since 2023. pdsmmpanel.com lists 2,143 services from $0.0007 per 1,000, simplefollows.com 870 from $0.0008. On the 8 services both sell, pdsmmpanel.com is cheaper on 7. simplefollows.com shows a public counter — 236K orders, about 37 a day (+183 over 5 days) — while pdsmmpanel.com shows none. Neither has reviews on the platforms we read. Of the 6 measures compared, simplefollows.com leads 4 and pdsmmpanel.com 2. Whichever you choose, start with a small order.
Comparing the lowest public rate per 1,000 on the services both sell — Instagram followers: $0.186 on pdsmmpanel.com against $0.278 on simplefollows.com; Instagram likes: $0.024 on pdsmmpanel.com against $0.038 on simplefollows.com; Instagram views: $0.0007 on pdsmmpanel.com against $0.0011 on simplefollows.com; Instagram shares: $0.012 on pdsmmpanel.com against $0.0008 on simplefollows.com. pdsmmpanel.com is cheaper on 7 of the 8; the cheapest offer on any service is not always the fastest or the most stable, so check refill and drop on each listing.
pdsmmpanel.com since 2023, no public counter; simplefollows.com since 2022, 236K orders on its counter. Age comes from the registry record or the web archive and counts towards the Trust Score; a counter that keeps moving counts more than a large frozen one.
pdsmmpanel.com: unclaimed, no reviews read, Trust Score 39. simplefollows.com: unclaimed, no reviews read, Trust Score 40. simplefollows.com has the stronger evidence behind it, and neither figure is a guarantee: start with a small order, check the delivery, and read the reviews behind each rating on the listing.