Experts Reviews · Company report
Smart Paws Chicago logoHow the Experts Score is calculatedEach factor is scored 0–100 on absolute terms (standing in the category can only raise it), then weighted; problems flagged in review highlights or a recent slide in ratings are subtracted:Satisfaction 55%97+52.9Reliability 24%96+23.3Value 14%100+14.1Replies to reviews 7%33+2.3Experts Score= 93Grade A: A = 80+, B = 60–79, C = 40–59, D = 20–39. Needs 10+ reviews.93SCORE

Smart Paws Chicago

Chicago, IL · Grade ALetter from the Experts Score: A = 80+, B = 60–79, C = 40–59, D = 20–39, F = under 20. · #26Position by Experts Score among all companies we track in this category. of 59 dog walkers · 5.0★ from 105 Google reviews

Report card

Percentile vs other dog walkers (100 = best)Each factor is scored 0–100 on absolute terms (star average, share of 1–2★ reviews, price verdicts…); standing within the category can only raise it, never lower it.. Strongest: value and momentum; weakest: replies to reviews.

SatisfactionSatisfaction · 54% of the scoreRecency-weighted star average (2-year half-life), shrunk toward the category mean by review volume; the company’s own lifetime average as the prior; absolute: 4.0★ = 0, 5★ = 100.Smart Paws Chicago is better than 97% of dog walkers.A
97
ReliabilityReliability · 24% of the scoreHow rarely jobs go badly: share of 1–2★ reviews — 60% the last 24 months (or the 20 newest if fewer), 40% all-time; 0% = 100, 15%+ = 0; the category percentile can only raise it.Smart Paws Chicago is better than 96% of dog walkers.A
96
Craft & serviceCraft & service · 0% of the scoreGoogle review highlights: Quality, Professionalism, Responsiveness, Punctuality — how rarely reviewers flag them as a negative, per review since highlights began; 0% = 100, 5%+ = 0. Subtracted from the score (up to −10), never averaged in — clean highlights are the norm, not a bonus.Smart Paws Chicago is better than —% of dog walkers.–
—
ValueValue · 14% of the scoreCustomers’ own price verdicts (Great / Reasonable vs Overpriced) and Value highlights; 65% absolute (all “reasonable” ≈ 80, “great” = 100), the category percentile can only raise it.Smart Paws Chicago is better than 100% of dog walkers.A
100
MomentumMomentum · 0% of the scorePenalises only a real slide: last-12-month average below lifetime (−0.5★ = 0). Still 4.8★+ over the last year, or steady/improving = 100. Subtracted from the score (up to −10), never averaged in.Smart Paws Chicago is better than 100% of dog walkers.A
100
Replies to reviewsReplies to reviews · 7% of the scoreHow often the owner publicly replies to reviews under 5★ (1–4★). Needs 3+ such reviews, otherwise not counted; 65% absolute (80%+ replied = 100), the category percentile can only raise it.Smart Paws Chicago is better than 33% of dog walkers.D
33

Reviews for your job

Customers hired Smart Paws Chicago for 1 kinds of job.

Smart Paws Chicago for cat sitting (in-home)

Clear ✕
Jobs reviewedHow many Google reviews are tagged with this job.1
★ on this jobAverage stars on the reviews where the customer tagged this exact job (Google’s “Services” field).5.00
Usually paidThe price range customers picked most often for this job.—

All 1 Google reviews tagged “Cat sitting (in-home)”

Matt10 reviewsTotal number of Google reviews this person has written across all businesses on Google Maps (not just this one). More reviews usually means a more experienced, trustworthy reviewer. · 6 months ago★★★★★

I’ve been using Smart Paws for about a year now to watch my cats when I travel, and they’ve been great every single time. I rarely leave reviews, but this one was definitely warranted. Scheduling drop-in visits is a breeze, and they’re always super communicative. I love that they send updates and photos every…

Great priceCat sitting (in-home)

Price

Not enough reviews with a price yet.

Price verdictsGoogle asks reviewers whether the price was great, reasonable or overpriced; these are their answers.

Great price 75%Reasonable 25%Overpriced 0%Not sure 0%

Jobs customers hired them for

JobReviewsCategory typical
Dog walking2—

Compare with