The live reference for specialty coffee.

Cherrybook helps you decide which coffee is worth buying next. We track live coffees from more than 500 specialty roasters across 37 countries, spanning every major specialty market and producer-country roasters in Colombia, Panama, Brazil, India, and Vietnam; normalize the messy details into one schema; and show the evidence behind each coffee before you leave for the roaster’s checkout.

The job is simple: search the live shelf, compare real lots side by side, understand the strength of the signal, then buy directly from the roaster.

What we catalog

We collect public product information from roaster shops: coffee name, origin, producer, process, varietal, tasting notes, roast level, price, bag size, availability, and source URL. When roasters publish scores, sensory details, certifications, or freshness policies, we preserve those too.

Because every roaster describes coffee differently, Cherrybook normalizes the raw listing into shared vocabulary for origins, processes, varietals, flavor families, brew suitability, and sensory dimensions. That is what makes cross-roaster comparison possible.

When a coffee is sold through a multi-roaster stockist rather than the roaster’s own shop, we attribute the lot to the roaster who actually made it and note the seller on the page, so a DAK or Luna lot carried by a stockist reads as that roaster’s work, priced and sold where it’s actually available.

Cherrybook Index (CBI)

Cherrybook Index is a signal summary, not an independent cupping. It combines the strongest quality evidence Cherrybook can find for a coffee and reports how much coverage backs that number. A high score means the available signals are strong; low coverage means the score should be read cautiously.

Base components

• SCA grade (25%): roaster-published cupping score, mapped from 80-100 to 0-100.
• Coffee Review (20%): matched Coffee Review scores, mapped the same way.
• Reddit reputation (18%): public community sentiment about the roaster, distilled from r/Coffee, r/specialtycoffee, and adjacent subreddits.
• YouTube reputation (10%): sentiment from third-party YouTube reviewers (channels not run by the roaster).
• On-shop product ratings (12–18%): public aggregate star ratings from the coffee’s page on the roaster’s shop. Ratings must come from a supported platform, have at least 5 responses, and have been refreshed within 90 days. Weight rises with the evidence count: 12% for 5–24 ratings, 15% for 25–99, and 18% for 100 or more. The higher tiers require corroboration from another base signal; a ratings-only lot stays at 12%. Where available, the coffee page can also show recent identity-free excerpts and provider-supplied verification or incentive labels. Those excerpts do not add a second score signal.
• Cherrybook reader ratings (30%): public aggregate of exact-lot numeric ratings from signed-in Cherrybook users. Every eligible rating counts from the first, making this the strongest base signal. Sparse overall evidence is still pulled toward a neutral score through the confidence calculation.
• Transparency (5%): deterministic score for how thoroughly the roaster discloses each lot (tasting notes detail, producer, farm, process, varietal, harvest year, altitude). Specialty roasters typically publish this; sparser listings score lower on this axis, which is a disclosure signal, not a quality verdict on the cup itself.

Missing components are dropped and the remaining weights are renormalized. SCA and Coffee Review are capped together so two correlated cupping signals cannot dominate the score on their own. We also publish a 1-5 sensory radar (acidity, body, sweetness, balance, cleanliness) on the coffee card, but that’s editorial color only; taste is subjective per drinker, so we don’t treat it as a quality signal in the score itself.

Coverage shrinkage

Renormalization alone has a flaw: a coffee with only one weak source could be scored on that source alone, then mathematically beat a coffee with five sources averaging the same number. So after renormalizing, we shrink the result toward a neutral 50 baseline based on how much of the signal universe is actually covered. The formula is final_base = renormalized_base × confidence + 50 × (1 − confidence), where confidence = min(1, coverage / 0.40). A coffee at 40%+ weighted coverage scores at face value; a coffee at 5% coverage gets pulled most of the way to 50. You’ll see the shrinkage applied transparently on every coffee detail page so the math is visible, not hidden.

Bonuses and penalties

Cherrybook Index can move modestly for strong external evidence: Cup of Excellence results (finalist + auction premium), competition-lot matches (WBC / WBrC finalists), Good Food awards, Coffee Review Top 30 placement, sustained editorial coverage (Sprudge / DCN / Perfect Daily Grind), and Roaster of the Year recognition. Older in-stock lots can receive a small freshness decay when they appear to have sat too long without restock.

Coverage and confidence

Every score carries a confidence label derived from coverage: High confidence (≥55% coverage with 4+ sources) means a wide and independent panel; Confident (≥40% with 3+) means the score runs at face value with no shrinkage applied; Preliminary (≥25%) means partial shrinkage is in effect; below that the score is heavily pulled toward 50 and should be read as a placeholder. Coffees with too little useful signal at all show as Not yet rated rather than a misleading low number.

We also label data-quality gaps. If sensory information, flavor tags, or customer reviews are estimated or pending, the interface says so instead of silently pretending the catalog is complete.

Reviews

Two distinct review signals contribute to Cherrybook Index as base components (12–18% on-shop product ratings plus 30% Cherrybook reader ratings), and both are surfaced separately on coffee detail pages so you can read them on their own merits.

Public on-shop product ratings

When a roaster runs a review platform on their own shop (Yotpo, Reviews.io, Okendo, Loox, Stamped, Judge.me, or Shopify’s built-in reviews), we read the public review payload for each lot and surface the aggregate star rating and count. For Judge.me, Okendo, and Reviews.io, Cherrybook may also retain up to five recent short excerpts and show up to three on the coffee page. Reviewer names, profiles, email addresses, and full review bodies are not retained, and contact patterns inside the excerpt are redacted. Verified-buyer, incentive, and recommendation labels appear only when the third-party provider supplies them. Coverage is partial (only roasters who run one of those platforms expose data), but where it’s available it’s useful product-level customer evidence. The 1-5 average is mapped to 0-100 and contributes 12% to Cherrybook Index for 5–24 ratings, 15% for 25–99, or 18% for 100 or more. The higher tiers require at least one other base signal; a ratings-only lot remains at 12%. Only aggregates with a supported source, a refresh timestamp, and a validated product match qualify; those older than 90 days are omitted until refreshed. Excerpts are refreshed weekly, hidden after 30 days without a successful refresh, and never count separately toward Cherrybook Index. Storefront reviews may be moderated or incentivized, so the page presents them as third-party context rather than an independent Cherrybook verdict.

Cherrybook community tastings

A numeric rating is optional, but when a signed-in user submits one it joins the public aggregate for that exact lot and cannot be stored as a private rating. Written notes remain private unless the user separately chooses to share them. Shared notes appear under the user’s display name, never their email, and may show the associated rating and verdict. Ratings without a shared note remain anonymous in the aggregate.

Every eligible numeric rating counts from the first on the same 1-5 to 0-100 mapping at a 30% base weight, making exact-lot reader evidence the strongest base signal. The broader confidence calculation still pulls a score with sparse evidence toward a neutral 50. A 24-hour account-age gate limits instant signup abuse. Once eligible, a saved or cleared rating refreshes the aggregate and Cherrybook Index inline. Ratings saved under the former private default remain excluded until their owner resubmits them after seeing the current disclosure.

The tools

Everything above feeds a set of working surfaces, each answering a different question:

• Search: ask in plain language ("a juicy natural under $20 for V60"); typo-tolerant on roaster, coffee, and producer names.
• Compare: put 2 to 5 lots side by side and get a ranked verdict with the reasoning spelled out.
• Flight: a guided tasting itinerary built from what’s in stock right now.
• Trending: weekly readings of what roasters are releasing: varietal and process surges, fast sellouts, fresh reviewer coverage.
• Standouts: the catalog’s edges, pulled live: most expensive, best value, rarest variety, highest index.
• Lookbook: editorial recognition for style and craft: bag design, blend naming, packaging, voice.
• Merch: roaster-branded apparel and drinkware, searchable the same way as coffee.

Commerce

Cherrybook does not sell coffee. Every buy link sends you to the roaster’s own product page. The roaster controls price, inventory, fulfillment, returns, and customer service.

Some outbound links may earn Cherrybook a commission. Affiliate status does not affect ranking, Cherrybook Index, search results, or editorial placement.

Freshness and limits

Catalogs are re-scraped weekly, with external signals (reviews, reputation, accolades, trends) refreshed on a separate weekly pass. Coffee inventory still moves fast: prices, availability, roast timing, and shipping terms should always be verified on the roaster’s site before purchase.

Cherrybook is strongest when roasters publish rich data. Sparse listings can still be useful for search and comparison, but they will carry lower confidence until more evidence exists.