.rating
Is .rating a real TLD? Who’s applying to run it?
.rating is not contested. One application for it is on ICANN’s Reveal Day list, as of 7 October 2026. It is NextGEN TLDs GmbH.
A descriptive label for review and rating sites; handy as a secondary address, rarely chosen as a serious primary identity.
review aggregators, consumer-rating and comparison sites, and credit, ESG or product rating services wanting a descriptive address alongside their main domain
The 2012 applications making the most similar bet. Chosen by AI from every string in that round, without being told what happened to any of them.
Same bet exactly: a bare English evaluation noun offered as an open namespace where any reviewer, critic site or feedback platform can plant its primary identity, and which only works if the registry can get enough independent evaluators to prefer it over a .com.
The plural of the identical bet — a generic verdict-word positioned as the natural home for sites whose entire product is published judgements, selling on the word's descriptive power rather than on any brand, community or regulated body behind it.
Also a generic noun for an evaluation that one party gives another, aimed at the same reputation/opinion category of registrant, but it names the act of commenting rather than the scored verdict, so it courts support and survey tools more than raters and scoring agencies.
What a .rating domain is
.rating is not a TLD yet. It is a string on our record of the ICANN 2026 new gTLD round, filed under Commerce. One application for it is on ICANN’s Reveal Day list.
Is the .rating domain extension real yet?
.rating is not yet a domain extension you can register: nothing resolves under it, and no registrar sells names in it. It is a string applicants have put forward in the ICANN 2026 new gTLD round, the process that decides whether it becomes one.
When can you buy a .rating domain?
You can’t yet. ICANN publishes every applied-for string on Reveal Day, 7 October 2026 at 18:00 UTC. A .rating name can only be registered after that, once the string is delegated and its registry opens. Last round's closest parallel to .rating was .review, delegated on 25 March 2015.
Is .rating a real TLD?
Not yet. .rating is not in the DNS root, so nothing resolves under it. It’s here because .rating is on ICANN’s Reveal Day list of applied-for strings. Every entry on this page links to its source.
- NextGEN TLDs GmbH · first recordedICANN
“GEL2647T-T15541 · Glass Emotion, LLC · primary · contention set 2026-116 NSL2674T-T66583 · NAME SPACE LLC · primary · contention set 2026-116 NTG2671T-T35907 · NextGEN TLDs GmbH · replacement string of .tkns · Deactivated XL2625T-T36661 · XYZ.COM LLC · replacement string of .dao · Deactivated”ICANN
- Band chosen: 30-49, usable but limited. The string is a plain generic noun with a clear meaning, so registrations are likely to happen at volume or on price from review platforms, comparison sites and rating agencies (credit, ESG, product, employer) that want a descriptive second address. The closest analogies are the existing .reviews and .review TLDs from the previous round; by analogy, those drew volume that tracked promotional pricing more than durable primary-identity use, and their aftermarkets stayed thin, which is what the band describes. It is not in the 50-69 band because there is no visible pattern of serious projects adopting a rating-themed TLD as the name people actually say and remember; the natural choice for a rating business remains a conventional namespace with 'rating' in the second-level label. It is not in the 10-29 band because the word is a real category descriptor with recurring commercial demand, not a joke or event-driven string, and singular 'rating' pairs naturally with modifiers (credit, ESG, energy, safety) in a way that gives a few end-uses genuine utility. The one application on the record is standard (not brand or community), consistent with an open generic registry, and the operator also lists .module as a replacement string; both facts are neutral to adoption. Main market uncertainty: whether the existing review-and-rating TLDs are quietly producing real primary-identity sites (which would argue for the upper half of the band) or are mostly defensive and discount registrations (which would hold the score near the floor); figures on that are unknown to me under the rules here.